71 dead found in a truck abandoned in Austria

[Deleted member 210577]

But you have a sense of entitlement, which ties in to "deserving" something. You think your "right" to maintain your culture (which is far from guaranteed to erode if you take in these refugees) trumps their right to flee persecution. Shit happens? When you destablize a region and the displaced persons come knocking on your door, it sure does!

Your damn right we have a right to defend our culture and nation. You might dream of holding hands beneath a rainbow whilst singing Imagine by Lenon, the real world does not work like that unfortunately.

You are denying refugees legal rights, you are denying that they even are refugees, you are denying that their right to exist trumps your right to preserve your culture (which is a false dichotomy). From my perspective, it seems like you are denying "these people" their basic rights.

They were refugees when they fled into Turkey and surrounding nations. By definition they ceased to be refugees when they decided to seek out a better economic prospect for themselves. They sought refuge, they found it.. safety from persecution and bombs falling. No one has denied these people their rights at all. The UN should have been way more involved a LONG fucking time ago, set up proper processing in the surrounding nations. Somehow this has become our problem all of a sudden? Not my problem.. I was making a fuss about Syria long before anything happened, but no one listened.

Yep, lets keep modern day slavery up. Iphones and cheap garments FTW! What a wonderful consumer based, neo-liberal "culture" the West has cultivated. Fuck these people who want to see their children prosper, gadgets are at stake!

What a solid argument. But again it shows that underneath what your position is actually about is self-loathing and hatred towards the West, typical of most people on the left. Instead of condemning the entire enterprise why don't you point the blame where it really belongs, principally at the feet of narcissistic drug addled baby boomers.

 

[RedWhiteNTrue]

And you deny that people from other nations should be afforded this same privilege based on the geography of their birth? What makes you so special and what makes you deserving of this more than anyone else? Their religious beliefs? gtfo.

This is the whole idea behind why Native Americans deserved the territory of the USA. Birth. Its by no means the best place to live? Perhaps I should show up in Monaco and demand a better life, a condo on the beach, we have daily shootings in my city, I would have a much better life if only Monaco gave me free shelter/food.

Some people will undoubtedly live in areas were there isn't plentiful food, nice houses and paved roads. That is reality. Given a finite amount of space in Europe, UK actually being one of the most densely populated areas in the world! Given the rate of reproduction in Africa, which is 2 to 3 times more than Western Europe. By your logic every person in the third world all what is it 2-3 billion people or more all have the right to pack into Europe. Have right to shelter, food, medical care all without working.

 

[spacejunk]

By your logic every person in the third world all what is it 2-3 billion people or more all have the right to pack into Europe. Have right to shelter, food, medical care all without working.

Another day, another bigoted strawman.
You spend a hell of a lot of time spamming the forum with your politics of division, but i'm yet to see any humanity or understanding in your contributions.
Your ramblings are thoroughly disingenuous. Not red or true.

 

[Helpmehelptheworld]

Why was red banned. Lol.

 

[malakaix]

Yes, why was he banned?

 

[drug_mentor]

Your damn right we have a right to defend our culture and nation. You might dream of holding hands beneath a rainbow whilst singing Imagine by Lenon, the real world does not work like that unfortunately.

The problem with this theory is your nation played a significant causally responsible role in displacing these refugees by illegally destabilising the region through the 2003 invasion of Iraq. Your right to self determination is at odds with the right of these refugees to be free from persecution and danger. The fact is that you have a moral responsibility to bear some of the cost of the problems you caused.

It is ridiculously self-centered, immature and immoral to suggest that you can go around illegally bombing places, and when the fallout from this causes people to come knocking on your door, you have a "right to preserve your culture" and turn them away.

Before you go on about how it isn't the peoples fault, it is Tony Blair, the government, etc. Remember that states are held responsible for the actions and decisions of their leaders. When Germany paid reparations for WWI, it wasn't the people who made the decision to go to war who paid them, the money came out of the state treasury.

They were refugees when they fled into Turkey and surrounding nations. By definition they ceased to be refugees when they decided to seek out a better economic prospect for themselves. They sought refuge, they found it.. safety from persecution and bombs falling. No one has denied these people their rights at all. The UN should have been way more involved a LONG fucking time ago, set up proper processing in the surrounding nations. Somehow this has become our problem all of a sudden? Not my problem.. I was making a fuss about Syria long before anything happened, but no one listened.

What is the meaningful difference between being at serious risk of being killed by being beheaded, shot or blown up as compared to being at serious risk of dying of starvation, cholera, etc? The fundamental justification for refugee status is that their lives and well-being are constantly under threat. Whether the threat is a bunch of armed fundamentalists or a lack of food and medicine is fairly irrelevant.

When you consider that fleeing war is the causal influence which placed them in the position where they don't have access to adequate nutrition and medicine, it is particularly easy to see why refugee status still applies to those who have escaped conflict zones only to be housed in these massive refugee camps.

What a solid argument. But again it shows that underneath what your position is actually about is self-loathing and hatred towards the West, typical of most people on the left. Instead of condemning the entire enterprise why don't you point the blame where it really belongs, principally at the feet of narcissistic drug addled baby boomers.

You are always trying to reduce it to this nonsense, those who disagree with you "hate the West". I don't hate the West at all, but I am capable of acknowledging both the good and the bad that has been done in its name. The "culture" I was mocking was your notion that what was culturally valuable about the West was the availability of "phones and nice clothing".

 

[Helpmehelptheworld]

So you're saying that someone caused a problem there by destabilizing it. Then if it was caused by going there and putting it into this state... Doesn't it seem logical that you could fix it in the same manner? Why should EU provide literal LAND and massive influxes of middle easterners and africans when you can just use resources correctly to help them there.

But no no. It only works to cause problems from far away. To fix them you have to put the golden spoon in their mouth, be as PC as possible, and baby the fuck out of all these 'refugees'.

The statement of starving and cholera etc is just annoying to be frank. Does starvation come raining down from the sky? Is it forcibly brought onto these people? No. If they stopped and looked around and started building from the minute they left the 'war-zones or other dangers!' Then they could actually build something for themselves.

If that's too much to ask. Once again what in the fuck is the problem with having a due process?

You and all the other ultra sympathizers have still not responded to the question of WHY EUROPE is obligated yet no other continent is. Was russia not a destabilizer during the cold war? What about the conflicts between pakistan and india? China during it's communist expansion? Do these problems stem as far back as WWII as well? Fuck it why not just go back to the crusades.

Get over it. Those who started this shit show aren't even in office anymore. (If you are speaking about outside nations destabilizing)

Maybe you need to take a look at the culture itself in the middle east. It's piss poor and it's going to stay that way as long as people use religion as a justification for their ideologies.

Once again a prime example as well of why human life > All.

Don't you dare quote that and then say something along the lines of well if human life is so valuable then why don't you want to express empathy and help them regardless. BECAUSE THE ECONOMY WOULD GO IN THE SHITTER.
And if the economy goes in the shitter we end up like greece and in someone elses pocket. Slow immigration works. Assimilation and slow migration are key.

Let me throw the question back to you! What do you (who want to take the refugees in) suggest we go about it? I'd love to hear that.

 

[swilow]

Why was red banned. Lol.

Yes, why was he banned?

Its against the rules to have multiple accounts.

So much for true.

 

[drug_mentor]

So you're saying that someone caused a problem there by destabilizing it. Then if it was caused by going there and putting it into this state... Doesn't it seem logical that you could fix it in the same manner? Why should EU provide literal LAND and massive influxes of middle easterners and africans when you can just use resources correctly to help them there.

But no no. It only works to cause problems from far away. To fix them you have to put the golden spoon in their mouth, be as PC as possible, and baby the fuck out of all these 'refugees'.

I am not against fixing the problem, but the problem is not fixed right now. Right now, there are hundreds of thousands of people who are displaced and in danger as a direct result of military interventions which the UK participated in. This means that the UK has a moral responsibility to help the people in need of help, until they fix the problem. They caused the mess, responsibility means bearing some of the cost.

The statement of starving and cholera etc is just annoying to be frank. Does starvation come raining down from the sky? Is it forcibly brought onto these people? No. If they stopped and looked around and started building from the minute they left the 'war-zones or other dangers!' Then they could actually build something for themselves.

If that's too much to ask. Once again what in the fuck is the problem with having a due process?

"These people" were not starving until they were forced to run from their homes because of Western military intervention and the consequent uprising of extremist ideology. Is your argument really that they should build impromptu farms on the run, or in refugee camps? Even if that were possible, it would be months until they had any food, what is supposed to sustain them in the mean time? You really haven't thought this through, because it is a ridiculous notion.

The idea that they should somehow be synthesising their own medicines whilst on the run from conflict zones, or whilst settled in overpopulated and unhygienic refugee camps is even more ridiculous.

There is a due process, these people are entitled to claim asylum. If they are genuine refugees (which the overwhelming majority clearly are) then they are legally entitled to asylum, if they are not then a country has the right to deport them.

It is baffling to me that you are the same person who is arguing in P&S that all humans are equal, but here you are blaming refugees for their plight. Talk about cognitive dissonance!

You and all the other ultra sympathizers have still not responded to the question of WHY EUROPE is obligated yet no other continent is. Was russia not a destabilizer during the cold war? What about the conflicts between pakistan and india? China during it's communist expansion? Do these problems stem as far back as WWII as well? Fuck it why not just go back to the crusades.

Get over it. Those who started this shit show aren't even in office anymore. (If you are speaking about outside nations destabilizing)

I never said Europe should bear all of the responsibility, other countries should do more as well. The fact is, refugees have a right to seek asylum where they choose, Europe just happens to be convenient geographically for those who are in the Middle East and Africa, just as Australia is convenient for those in South East Asia and North America is convenient for those in Central America.

As I addressed in my last post, states are responsible for the actions of their elected officials. As soon as a politicians term is over you don't just get to throw your hands up and say it is no longer our fault, you elected these people. You seem to fundamentally misunderstand how international obligations work. States are collective entities, you are collectively responsible for the decisions that are made in the name of your state, whether you personally agreed with them or not.

Maybe you need to take a look at the culture itself in the middle east. It's piss poor and it's going to stay that way as long as people use religion as a justification for their ideologies.

You might consider why the Middle East is in the state that it is today. Here is a hint, it has an awful lot to do with exploitation by the West. If you want to deride any regions culture for being "piss poor", you might consider directing it at those places who think it is perfectly fine to spend money on bombs to drop on the Middle East, but totally unacceptable to spend any money housing the people who were negatively impacted by those bombs.

 

[Deleted member 210577]

The problem with this theory is your nation played a significant causally responsible role in displacing these refugees by illegally destabilising the region through the 2003 invasion of Iraq. Your right to self determination is at odds with the right of these refugees to be free from persecution and danger. The fact is that you have a moral responsibility to bear some of the cost of the problems you caused.

No, it's not. Our right to self-determination is.. our right. Moral responsibility is not enshrined in law. The public has every right to say "No, thank you, and fuck you, we will not bare the burden of a choice we wanted nothing to do with when our government didn't fucking listen to our wishes."

It is ridiculously self-centered, immature and immoral to suggest that you can go around illegally bombing places, and when the fallout from this causes people to come knocking on your door, you have a "right to preserve your culture" and turn them away.

The majority of our nation was against the war/s. An element within our government assassinated Dr. Kelly, the WMD expert. If you want to place blame lay it at the right fucking people, ie the Blair cabinet and the cunt politicians who continually lie even now (like Hague, Straw etc). Why should the law abiding and peaceful majority of our nation be held to account for something we had no fucking responsibility for causing. Yes it's shit what happened, but the idea that now we should bare the burden is ridiculous. Place the blame where it actually belongs before you go spouting off about being self-centred and immoral.

Before you go on about how it isn't the peoples fault, it is Tony Blair, the government, etc. Remember that states are held responsible for the actions and decisions of their leaders. When Germany paid reparations for WWI, it wasn't the people who made the decision to go to war who paid them, the money came out of the state treasury.

The public made its voice fucking clear on Iraq but the government did not listen. Short of instigating a revolutionary uprising or military coup, what the fuck were we supposed to do. I don't think many people actually believed our government would ignore such a huge portion of the populations wishes, or actually go forward with a strategy to destroy an entire nation.

You are always trying to reduce it to this nonsense, those who disagree with you "hate the West". I don't hate the West at all, but I am capable of acknowledging both the good and the bad that has been done in its name. The "culture" I was mocking was your notion that what was culturally valuable about the West was the availability of "phones and nice clothing".

If you can acknowledge the good and bad then why do you insist on allowing the public to take on yet another burden when they had nothing to do with it! A mistake was made, yes, but that does not justify causing more strife to the people of this country. That is pointless masochism and part of this guilty complex nonsense that we need to "repay our dues/moral responsibility". Get. Real. The world does not work like that.. violence fucking happens, and all you do by putting more pressure on the people of this country and the EU is ensure that even more violence will take place in the not so distant future.

Because, despite what the people on the left believe, you can not legislate violence out of existence or legislate peace into existence. Someone is always going to win, and someone will lose. And you mocking about culture shows you missed the fucking point entirely.. its not the phones and clothes, those are manifestations of culture, ones that more primitive nations now enjoy too.. the point is none of that would exist if it weren't for the past couple hundred years of EU cultural history that allowed these things to come forth. What has any middle eastern nation developed in the past 500 years. I'll wait.

 

[swilow]

Sorry Willow but this response shows your thinking, and I reject it completely. First, we do our duty already, through the formal channels. We do our bit. Highlighted in bold.. people who think in that way are a far greater danger to nations that any right wing person will ever be. You really should examine your head if you genuinely think like that, which I know a lot of people on the left do.. you see the right wing as heartless or racists bastards.. if only we did things your way we'd all live in peace. Dangerous thinking Willow.

We now need to do a bit more.

I don't neccesarily see the right as heartless. I see heartless people as heartless. But, of course I believe my opinions are correct. As you think of your's. I just happen to think you are completely wrong.

If you actually understand what multiculturalism means, and what it means for the future of nations, you would not support it for the simple fact that it does not work when taken to excess. Which it has been in the UK.

What does multiculturalism mean then?

Actually what you love is your hatred for those who hold conservative opinions, which is typical of the left. Got to stick it to the man, and all that.

You really do yourself an injustice when you start inventing shit. Hate doesn't come into play. I am more interestED in a compaSsionate solution to this crisis then arguing with a minority of misinformed people. I think conservatism is pointless, though as I have aged I understand it (and the right) more. The reason I think it is pointless is that you cannot really prevent change; it is inevitable. Its a losing battle. Better to prepare for the future rather then try and freeze the present.

The "peaceful" Muslims my country are failing to do their bit and root out the bullshit.. and they fail because when it comes down to it, they care ultimately more about Islam than the UK itself. That's just how it is.

Its pointless arguing with you because you have this mistaken idea that you can summarise the entirety of a religioun based on a few individuals. There is moderate Islam. It certainly does need to be discouraged though...

I don't especially like Islam, or any organised religion to be honest, but I'm not going to condemn those people because I feel differently to them. If people need help, civilised society does its bit to help.

How long will "he" or "she" be from Burma, India, Pakistan, Germany, Turkey? What you want is the destruction of this diversity. What you get is yours first replaced with these, and mixes of/with these (and further, a more unequal mix, with your own less and less represented, but who cares right? diversity rules!).

I just don't understand why you guys paraphrase arguments in such ridiculous ways. Not even worth responding to.

 

[drug_mentor]

No, it's not. Our right to self-determination is.. our right. Moral responsibility is not enshrined in law. The public has every right to say "No, thank you, and fuck you, we will not bare the burden of a choice we wanted nothing to do with when our government didn't fucking listen to our wishes."

But the 1951 Refugee Convention is enshrined in law and the UK is bound by it. Why do you keep ignoring this? You do not have the right to break international law, and that is what refusing to take in refugees is.

The majority of our nation was against the war/s. An element within our government assassinated Dr. Kelly, the WMD expert. If you want to place blame lay it at the right fucking people, ie the Blair cabinet and the cunt politicians who continually lie even now (like Hague, Straw etc). Why should the law abiding and peaceful majority of our nation be held to account for something we had no fucking responsibility for causing. Yes it's shit what happened, but the idea that now we should bare the burden is ridiculous. Place the blame where it actually belongs before you go spouting off about being self-centred and immoral.

Because that is how collective entities work. You are responsible for the acts of your Government. You had a say, you elected these people. The people of the Middle East had no say in whether your bombs got dropped. It is a bit rich to play the victim here.

The public made its voice fucking clear on Iraq but the government did not listen. Short of instigating a revolutionary uprising or military coup, what the fuck were we supposed to do. I don't think many people actually believed our government would ignore such a huge portion of the populations wishes, or actually go forward with a strategy to destroy an entire nation.

What were the people of the Middle East supposed to do? They had nothing to do with your domestic politics. I would still disagree with you, but you might have a leg to stand on if Tony Blair wasn't re elected after the 2003 invasion. In light of the fact that he was re elected, it is clear that the British voting public endorsed this illegal war and you can not now claim you have no responsibility just because the reality you are facing is inconvenient.

If you can acknowledge the good and bad then why do you insist on allowing the public to take on yet another burden when they had nothing to do with it! A mistake was made, yes, but that does not justify causing more strife to the people of this country. That is pointless masochism and part of this guilty complex nonsense that we need to "repay our dues/moral responsibility". Get. Real. The world does not work like that.. violence fucking happens, and all you do by putting more pressure on the people of this country and the EU is ensure that even more violence will take place in the not so distant future.

A mistake was made by the people of your country. Why do you think it is more reasonable for foreigners to pay for this mistake than the people of your country? I explained in my previous passage how the British public did have something to do with it, namely by electing Tony Blair pre invasion and then re electing him post invasion.

Because, despite what the people on the left believe, you can not legislate violence out of existence or legislate peace into existence. Someone is always going to win, and someone will lose. And you mocking about culture shows you missed the fucking point entirely.. its not the phones and clothes, those are manifestations of culture, ones that more primitive nations now enjoy too.. the point is none of that would exist if it weren't for the past couple hundred years of EU cultural history that allowed these things to come forth. What has any middle eastern nation developed in the past 500 years. I'll wait.

You are such a bigot, "primitive nations"? You realise that the Middle East has been shit on by the West since the fall of the Ottoman empire, divided up in to a bunch of arbitrary states for the benefit of various powers, with violent puppet dictators installed and endorsed by the West. Since then there has been a Soviet invasion and various military incursions by Western powers. I wonder what your country would look like now if similar injustices were imposed on it in the last century.

 

[Deleted member 210577]

But the 1951 Refugee Convention is enshrined in law and the UK is bound by it. Why do you keep ignoring this? You do not have the right to break international law, and that is what refusing to take in refugees is.

We are not breaking international law. We already take in refugees every year, through the proper channels for it.

Because that is how collective entities work. You are responsible for the acts of your Government. You had a say, you elected these people. The people of the Middle East had no say in whether your bombs got dropped. It is a bit rich to play the victim here.

Bullshit. I don't hold it against the Germans for getting duped by their government, or any other nation that has gone off the rails and done stupid shit in the past. If you want to play the collective blame game then EVERY person in a developed nation is responsible for a whole host of shit, ranging from corruption, to environmental destruction, to interference in the affairs of other nations.

What were the people of the Middle East supposed to do? They had nothing to do with your domestic politics. I would still disagree with you, but you might have a leg to stand on if Tony Blair wasn't re elected after the 2003 invasion. In light of the fact that he was re elected, it is clear that the British voting public endorsed this illegal war and you can not now claim you have no responsibility just because the reality you are facing is inconvenient.

100% of the public did not vote for Labour or Blair. I certainly didn't (not old enough). about 9 million people voted for Labour. And if you check the areas where they won.. hmmm interesting, London, Midlands, and other assorted shitholes of this country which have the highest demographic of certain people, people who vote with other agendas in mind. Hmmm interesting that.

A mistake was made by the people of your country. Why do you think it is more reasonable for foreigners to pay for this mistake than the people of your country? I explained in my previous passage how the British public did have something to do with it, namely by electing Tony Blair pre invasion and then re electing him post invasion.

See my previous point and see the demographic distribution of voting through the UK/where Labour got majorities. EDIT: The reason why Labour opened up the borders in the first place was to help import more voters.. its core demographic is not the working class man of this country, but people who've come over and want an easy ride. Hence, why they're always keen to keep the gates open.. no one with two brain cells would ever vote Labour (hence why so many left/liberal idiots keep voting Labour too).

You are such a bigot, "primitive nations"? You realise that the Middle East has been shit on by the West since the fall of the Ottoman empire, divided up in to a bunch of arbitrary states for the benefit of various powers, with violent puppet dictators installed and endorsed by the West. Since then there has been a Soviet invasion and various military incursions by Western powers. I wonder what your country would look like now if similar injustices were imposed on it in the last century.

Still waiting for you to tell me what they've contributed..

 

[Deleted member 210577]

We now need to do a bit more.

I don't neccesarily see the right as heartless. I see heartless people as heartless. But, of course I believe my opinions are correct. As you think of your's. I just happen to think you are completely wrong.

We do enough already. And stop this 'heartless people' nonsense. Everyone has a heart, but evidently not everyone has a brain.

You really do yourself an injustice when you start inventing shit. Hate doesn't come into play. I am more interestED in a compaSsionate solution to this crisis then arguing with a minority of misinformed people. I think conservatism is pointless, though as I have aged I understand it (and the right) more. The reason I think it is pointless is that you cannot really prevent change; it is inevitable. Its a losing battle. Better to prepare for the future rather then try and freeze the present.

You evidently do not understand conservatism. Nor do you understand that being progressive and 'moving forward' isn't necessarily a good thing.

Its pointless arguing with you because you have this mistaken idea that you can summarise the entirety of a religioun based on a few individuals. There is moderate Islam. It certainly does need to be discouraged though...

I don't especially like Islam, or any organised religion to be honest, but I'm not going to condemn those people because I feel differently to them. If people need help, civilised society does its bit to help.

Extremists are one kettle of fish. But you are wrong, there is no moderate Islam. It shouldn't even really be called a religion, its more a cult than anything. Please go and educate yourself about what happens when the demographic shifts towards larger percentages of Muslim populations in non-islamic nations. These people simply do not give a toss about anything outside of Islam when faced with the choice between options. Hence 'moderate Islam' is an oxymoron.

 

[drug_mentor]

We are not breaking international law. We already take in refugees every year, through the proper channels for it.

At best you are currently exploiting a legal grey area because the people who you refuse to accommodate have not set foot on UK soil, mostly thanks to great efforts undertaken by your Government. Though I am fairly certain that you advocate for more extreme policy which would be unambiguously against the law.

Bullshit. I don't hold it against the Germans for getting duped by their government, or any other nation that has gone off the rails and done stupid shit in the past. If you want to play the collective blame game then EVERY person in a developed nation is responsible for a whole host of shit, ranging from corruption, to environmental destruction, to interference in the affairs of other nations.

We aren't talking about ancient history here, we are talking about shit that happened in the last decade or so, give me a break. Germany paid reparations for both WWI and WWII, so it is a pretty bad example of not holding people accountable. They were forced to pay for their mistakes. Apparently, you don't think Britain should be held to the same standard which they imposed on Germany. Your whole ideology is one big double standard where the only interests that matter are your own.

100% of the public did not vote for Labour or Blair. I certainly didn't (not old enough). about 9 million people voted for Labour. And if you check the areas where they won.. hmmm interesting, London, Midlands, and other assorted shitholes of this country which have the highest demographic of certain people, people who vote with other agendas in mind. Hmmm interesting that.

Seriously, this is like talking to a child. Of course 100% of people in a state with a population of 64 million people did not agree on anything. Democracy works by majority. You are part of a collective entity, you get to enjoy the benefits of being a member of this collective entity, similarly, you also inherit certain obligations by virtue of this membership. One of those obligations is that the entire entity is responsible for a democratic majority decision. Another obligation is that the state as a collective entity is responsible for the actions of a democratically elected Government. This is how the International political system works.

Still waiting for you to tell me what they've contributed..

It is quite repugnant that despite the many recent historical injustices which I have just pointed out to you that have taken place in the Middle East over the last hundred years, which have had significant deleterious impacts on education, infrastructure, stability and the economy in the region, that you are smugly requesting that I providing examples of their "contributions", as though the fact that there may be relatively few proves their people or culture to be inferior.

How do you think Britain would be doing if it had experienced half of the shit that the Middle East has over the last hundred years? I think you might find the "contributions" your state made in this scenario would be quite lacking.

I am not a historian, I honestly couldn't point you to any recent Middle Eastern innovations. Anyone who isn't blind would see that this is not a reflection on the people or culture but their recent, very unfortunate, history.

Extremists are one kettle of fish. But you are wrong, there is no moderate Islam. It shouldn't even really be called a religion, its more a cult than anything. Please go and educate yourself about what happens when the demographic shifts towards larger percentages of Muslim populations in non-islamic nations. These people simply do not give a toss about anything outside of Islam when faced with the choice between options. Hence 'moderate Islam' is an oxymoron.

Are you a theologian now? Stop these hateful generalisations.

 

[DutchBloke]

For me it's quite clear.

-About 9 countries are needed to be crossed before actually ariving in the Netherlands out from syria, most of them are men (numbers from local refugee centre) looking for wealth, not just refuge.
-These people just forced themselves into europe and then act like shit and even expect to be given everything they needed.
-Media only portrays them as 'harmles' and 'fragile' but liveleak tells a different story.
-I can't find a new appartment (Really great in a breakup) because them 'syrians' are aiming for all the low-priced buildings, The prices ofcourse went SKYROCKETING
-If they can't ID that they are actually syrians used to be living in a hotzone, just fuck off really. I mean these guys throw their ID's out so that they can be the playing syrian refugee card. (I have seen many many different flags on online sources, including pakistan.

Now let's not talk about crime rates, the huge culture shock, unemployed rates.

IMO they should enforce the borders like sh*t and after that go through some thorough checks before one lets in an actual syrian wanting help.

 

[spacejunk]

You don't go demanding or forcing your way into another nation. At that point you are no longer a migrant but an invading force. Anyone who sanctions that action, which appears to be nearly all of the mainstream media and international agencies, have lost their minds and are totally corrupted. It's being spun as Hungary acting wrongly.. that is very worrying.

I can not believe anyone at this point still wants to welcome these people into our nations.

Get. Real. The world does not work like that.. violence fucking happens, and all you do by putting more pressure on the people of this country and the EU is ensure that even more violence will take place in the not so distant future.

Indeed - get real. Civil disobedience happens when desperate people are running for their lives.
Frankly i'm disgusted to read some of the things you say. I find it far more repellant than helping people in one of the largest humanitarian catastrophes the world has ever seen.
Open you mind, open your heart. Lose the fear, it'd do you good.
It won't hurt.
You might just feel a bit of a prick.

 

[Deleted member 210577]

At best you are currently exploiting a legal grey area because the people who you refuse to accommodate have not set foot on UK soil, mostly thanks to great efforts undertaken by your Government. Though I am fairly certain that you advocate for more extreme policy which would be unambiguously against the law.

All I can say is, thank FUCK we are an island. The UK has 1/8th of the total EU population, 84% of that is in England. We are a tiny fucking island, which is broke and up to its eyeballs in debt. Our infrastructure can not cope. Young people can't find jobs. And you wonder why the majority of people do not want even more people coming to this nation? Inviting even more people here is going to sink this island. To be honest the damage has already been done, but yeh.. you know, I would actually like to get myself started in life, as would my friends and those younger than ourselves, without getting more and more shafted by idiotic baby boomers who continue to want to play the world leader and care bear strategy.

You want me to say it, i'll happily say it. I do not want more people coming to this country. At this point it is full. Pragmatically, logistically, it is full. Even if it wasn't I would still have massive reservations about this many people coming over who are simply not culturally compatible. Call me racist or whatever you like.. I don't care. Standing up for the future of your country is not a bad thing. I'd rather we have some level of inequality now, and continue to raise everyone up a few notches over time, as we have done for so long.. as opposed to dragging everyone (except the 0.1%) down into the shitter just to make a few of you with "big hearts" feel better about yourselves.

Are you a theologian now? Stop these hateful generalisations.

Hateful? I'm not the one who follows a religion that is based on intolerance and forcing, directly or indirectly, the submission of non-believers into its cause. Stop apologizing for this nonsense. There is no moderate Islam, period.

 

[drug_mentor]

All I can say is, thank FUCK we are an island. The UK has 1/8th of the total EU population, 84% of that is in England. We are a tiny fucking island, which is broke and up to its eyeballs in debt. Our infrastructure can not cope. Young people can't find jobs. And you wonder why the majority of people do not want even more people coming to this nation? Inviting even more people here is going to sink this island. To be honest the damage has already been done, but yeh.. you know, I would actually like to get myself started in life, as would my friends and those younger than ourselves, without getting more and more shafted by idiotic baby boomers who continue to want to play the world leader and care bear strategy.

Boo fucking hoo. As I recall you are currently enjoying an education at University, one which is no doubt Government subsidised to some extent. I believe healthcare is still free where you live (for the most part). I don't think you are in any real danger of starving or being shot. You already got a start in life. The people fleeing conflict which has been caused in part by your states irresponsible foreign policy don't know where their next meal is coming from and are essentially stateless. What about their start?

You want me to say it, i'll happily say it. I do not want more people coming to this country. At this point it is full. Pragmatically, logistically, it is full. Even if it wasn't I would still have massive reservations about this many people coming over who are simply not culturally compatible. Call me racist or whatever you like.. I don't care. Standing up for the future of your country is not a bad thing. I'd rather we have some level of inequality now, and continue to raise everyone up a few notches over time, as we have done for so long.. as opposed to dragging everyone (except the 0.1%) down into the shitter just to make a few of you with "big hearts" feel better about yourselves.

Yep, that is what this whole debate is about. It isn't about helping hundreds of thousands of people fleeing death and persecution, it is about making people of a particular political persuasion feel better about themselves... 8)

Hateful? I'm not the one who follows a religion that is based on intolerance and forcing, directly or indirectly, the submission of non-believers into its cause. Stop apologizing for this nonsense. There is no moderate Islam, period.

You are pulling this out your ass. How many Muslims do you know? I have met a good number of moderate Muslims, they exist. You are simply asserting something which, even if it were true (and it isn't), you would have absolutely no way of knowing. You are not omniscient, you can't see in to the minds of over 1.5 billion people, so drop the bullshit.

 

[spacejunk]

"Standing up for the future of your country" is such a subjective concept.
One could just as easily argue that you're encouraging a new era of demagogue xenophobic reactionaries who will keep the UK stuck in the post-Thatcherite neo-con quagmire for generations.

Won't somebody think of the children?*






* So long as they're 'white', yeah?