Syrian Refugee Crisis (aka: Muslim Exodus and Europe)

[George Wallace]

Good to see that Intelligence and Security Agencies are doing their jobs:

Reproduced under the Fair Dealings provisions of the Copyright Act.

ISIS in Europe? Hungary uncovers two ‘terrorists’ posing as refugees
RT
Published time: 9 Sep, 2015 09:21
Edited time: 9 Sep, 2015 12:06

European politicians have expressed concerns that Islamic State (formerly ISIS/ISIL) militants could be infiltrating EU borders under the guise of refugees. Hungarian media reports that at least two ISIS militants were uncovered after entering an unspecified European country as refugees.

The identification of the extremist fighters was made possible after the two revealed their identities by posting photographs on social media, Hungary’s M1 television reported Tuesday.

“Islamist terrorists, disguised as refugees, have showed up in Europe. [The] pictures were uploaded on various social networks to show that terrorists are now present in most European cities. Many, who are now illegal immigrants, fought alongside Islamic State before,” the report said.

The Hungarian channel showed photographs from the alleged terrorists’ Facebook pages. The first set depicted two individuals with weapons in the Middle East and the second set showed them smiling as they arrived in Europe.

It is still not clear which country the two suspects were discovered – some suggested they made it as far as Germany – or if they have been arrested. No names have so far been released.

It is, however, convincing that these two individuals have been associated with terrorist groups in the past, a co-director of humanitarian organization Pressenza, Tony Robinson, told RT.

“From what I can see in the report it was an investigation of Facebook pages of individuals, who in the past associated with terror groups, and who now on their personal pages are posting pictures of themselves, showing that they are in Germany, they are in the West,” he said. “Either way there are almost certainly individuals, who have belonged to terrorist groups in the past, some of them, no doubt will be radicalized to the extent that they will be prepared to commit acts of violence and terrorism against cities of Europe.”

Some politicians have said that Islamic State might be winning if people are abandoning their homes in Iraq or Syria. French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius said: “It’s very difficult, but if all these refugees come to Europe or elsewhere, then Islamic State has won.”

A Middle East expert has expressed similar concerns. “This is a major challenge for Europe, but it’s also giving [Islamic State] the possibility to claim victory, because it has claimed its goal is to get rid of every ethnic religious and cultural diversity from the Middle East. ISIS has stated very clearly that all the region should be under Sunni leadership. And therefore those who won’t convert should leave and they have been pushing a lot of people to leave,” Mansouria Mokhefi, of the French Institute for International Relations, told RT.

Hungary is among several European countries that have been struggling to deal with the influx of migrants and refugees breaching its borders, fleeing violence in the Middle East and North Africa. Hungarian police have been challenged with hundreds of asylum seekers stuck near the Serbian border. Hundreds have fled into nearby cornfields, aiming to reach Budapest on foot.

As Europe is left overwhelmed by the refugee crisis, the Gulf States have continued to ignore the problem by shutting their borders and refusing to take in asylum seekers, drawing in criticism from human rights organizations, including Human Rights Watch (HRW).

“Other countries need to do more,” Human Rights Watch deputy director for the Middle East and North Africa, Nadim Houry, tweeted. He also described the wealthy countries’ inaction on the Syrian refugee crisis as “shameful.”

Since the war in Syria started in 2011, Kuwait has accepted only seven refugees, the United Arab Emirates just 16, and Saudi Arabia only four.

In fact, instead of embracing a solution, Saudi Arabia is putting up a 900-kilometer razor wire fence on its border with Iraq. There are also underground movement sensors being installed, which are capable of triggering silent alarms.

It would make a lot of sense for refugees to enter some Gulf States, where they can quickly become productive, hard-working residents, the director of the Institute for Gulf Affairs, Ali Al-Ahmed, told RT.

“The Gulf countries are more interested in funding armed groups in Syria, rather than assisting the Syrian people, inviting them to live in the Gulf. Syrian refugees in the Gulf are not going to be refugees, they will be working. There are no social, cultural and religious barriers for Syrian refugees in the Gulf. It is going to be much cheaper to have them move to the Gulf and it will be easier for them to move back to Syria,” Al-Ahmed said.

RT Video NEWS and more on LINK.

Note at the end of the article, the actions being taken by other Islamic states to keep refugees out.

 

[Kirkhill]

Isn't it interesting how often RT gets cited these days?

One thing often forgotten about the guys and gals from the KGB was that only part of their job was to spread the Gospel of Lenin.  Another part of their job was to disrupt governments of the day by rendering their countries ungovernable.  That meant actively supporting opposition - parliamentary and non-parliamentary - regardless of the oppositions' and the governments' professed ideology.

 

[Edward Campbell]

Isn't it interesting how often RT gets cited these days?

One thing often forgotten about the guys and gals from the KGB was that only part of their job was to spread the Gospel of Lenin.  Another part of their job was to disrupt governments of the day by rendering their countries ungovernable.  That meant actively supporting opposition - parliamentary and non-parliamentary - regardless of the oppositions' and the governments' professed ideology.

Yes, and sometimes by the same people who say that Al Jazeera or Xinhua are "false." I guess that, on some issues, RT plays to our own perceptions of truth, or Правда, if you like.

 

[jollyjacktar]

Be that as it may source-wise, I have not doubt that ISIS wants to insert a wolf or two among  the sheep stampeding towards the exits and it's possible this report is genuine.

 

[Edward Campbell]

Be that as it may source-wise, I have not doubt that ISIS wants to insert a wolf or two among  the sheep stampeding towards the exits and it's possible this report is genuine.

No dispute; I agree 100%; but Russia's goal is not to help refugees and it is only peripherally to help IS** or Syria or Iran or anyone else. Russia's goal is to destabilize Eastern Europe and restore some semblance of Russian influence ... power is what Putin's after and RT is one of his tools. Russia wants to drive social wedges between the European peoples and their governments. Hungary is a weak link, the Schengen Agreement ~ open borders ~ is a prize.

 

[Kirkhill]

No dispute; I agree 100%; but RussiaPutin's goal is not to help refugees and it is only peripherally to help IS** or Syria or Iran or anyone else. RussiaPutin's goal is to destabilize Eastern Europe and restore some semblance of Russian influence ... power is what Putin's after and RT is one of his tools. Russia Putin wants to drive social wedges between the European peoples and their governments. Hungary is a weak link, the Schengen Agreement ~ open borders ~ is a prize.

FTFY.

Edit (Missed one)

 

[Edward Campbell]

FTFY.

Edit (Missed one)

I know it was some other guy, but "l'état, c'est moi" applies in Putin's Russia, too ... or, at least, it does until some other guy sticks a knife between Putins ribs or puts a bullet between his eyes. Then we can interchange "Russia" with the other guy's name.

 

[Kirkhill]

I know it was some other guy, but "l'état, c'est moi" applies in Putin's Russia, too ... or, at least, it does until some other guy sticks a knife between Putins ribs or puts a bullet between his eyes. Then we can interchange "Russia" with the other guy's name.

Or he suddenly has to visit a psychiatric hospital ....

An interesting and tangential debate might be whether or not there is a State of Russia - or whether or not it is strictly a construct of the strongman of the day.  I think I might be able to argue that Russian governance owes much to the model of Genghis and Khublai.  Absent the strong man there is only a collection of dispersed tribes.  Currently the dominant tribe is the Moscow tribe. 

As it stands I believe that, like Louis, the State of Russia (the internationally recognized government) is Putin and Putin alone.  And right now I believe the threat can be narrowed down to the particular and the personal.

 

[CougarKing]

How the wrath of the Twittersphere/Blogosphere can even end careers:

CBC

Video journalist fired after apparently kicking, tripping refugees in Hungary
Videos spark outrage online

CBC News Posted: Sep 08, 2015 8:49 PM ET Last Updated: Sep 08, 2015 9:35 PM ET

Thousands more refugees to arrive in Hungary in next 10 days: UN
Refugee crisis brings out best and worst in Europe: Nahlah Ayed

A Hungarian camerawoman has reportedly been fired after videos surfaced online that appear to show her kicking and tripping refugees as they run from Hungarian police.

On Tuesday, hundreds of refugees broke away from a police registration point near Hungary's border with Serbia, reported the Associated Press.

A video posted on Twitter by German reporter Stephan Richter, shows a number of journalists filming as officers pursued the refugees.


(...SNIPPED)

 

[George Wallace]

Another interesting take, from an Australian blog site, referencing other Middle Eastern nations views towards accepting Syrian refugees/migrants:



Reproduced under the Fair Dealings provisions of the Copyright Act.

Kuwaiti official explains why Gulf States cannot accept refugees
BY REDBAITER on SEPTEMBER 6, 2015

https://videos.files.wordpress.com/Eb7FsJTl/kuwaiti-says-no-to-refugees_dvd.mp4

I had to smile at this video. Perhaps less amusing is the expectation that such nonsense will probably find ready acceptance with the political class who maintain that the West has some unavoidable responsibility to accept mass invasion from cultures totally estranged from our customs, traditions and heritage. They will say “Yes, the Kuwaiti is right. They can’t go to the Gulf States, and this is why the West must take them all.”

For those who would prefer to see the reasons in text, here is what the official is saying-


                  Kuwait and the other Gulf Cooperation Council countries are too valuable to accept any refugees.

                  Our countries are only fit for workers. Its too costly to relocate them here.

                  Kuwait is too expensive for them anyway. As opposed to Lebanon and Turkey which are cheap. They are better suited for the Syrian refugees.

                  In the end, it is not right for us to accept a people that are different from us. We don’t want people that suffer from internal stress and trauma in our country.



Update: Breitbart has a story on this issue where the Gulf States present another more realistic reason for their reluctance to accept the so called refugees, and that is that they cannot accept the risk of terrorism that such an influx brings. This of course is a completely valid reason, one that applies to Western countries as well.

Especially when ISIS is openly declaring its intent to have its agents mingle with the so called refugees, and proclaiming that 4000 have entered Europe by this means already.

 

[The Bread Guy]

Another interesting take, from an Australian blog site, referencing other Middle Eastern nations views towards accepting Syrian refugees/migrants:

Agree or disagree, if the translation is correct, you have to give the guy credit for accuracy, brevity and clarity of message  ;D

 

[Kirkhill]

...et Thybrim multo spumantem sanguine cerno...

 
Virgil, Aeneid VI, 87,  - per http://timesonline.typepad.com/dons_life/2007/11/rivers-of-blood.html

Enoch Powell's 'Rivers of Blood' speech


Enoch Powell

12:01AM GMT 06 Nov 2007

This is the full text of Enoch Powell's so-called 'Rivers of Blood' speech, which was delivered to a Conservative Association meeting in Birmingham on April 20 1968.

The supreme function of statesmanship is to provide against preventable evils. In seeking to do so, it encounters obstacles which are deeply rooted in human nature.

One is that by the very order of things such evils are not demonstrable until they have occurred: at each stage in their onset there is room for doubt and for dispute whether they be real or imaginary. By the same token, they attract little attention in comparison with current troubles, which are both indisputable and pressing: whence the besetting temptation of all politics to concern itself with the immediate present at the expense of the future.

Above all, people are disposed to mistake predicting troubles for causing troubles and even for desiring troubles: "If only," they love to think, "if only people wouldn't talk about it, it probably wouldn't happen."

Perhaps this habit goes back to the primitive belief that the word and the thing, the name and the object, are identical.
At all events, the discussion of future grave but, with effort now, avoidable evils is the most unpopular and at the same time the most necessary occupation for the politician. Those who knowingly shirk it deserve, and not infrequently receive, the curses of those who come after.

A week or two ago I fell into conversation with a constituent, a middle-aged, quite ordinary working man employed in one of our nationalised industries.

After a sentence or two about the weather, he suddenly said: "If I had the money to go, I wouldn't stay in this country." I made some deprecatory reply to the effect that even this government wouldn't last for ever; but he took no notice, and continued: "I have three children, all of them been through grammar school and two of them married now, with family. I shan't be satisfied till I have seen them all settled overseas. In this country in 15 or 20 years' time the black man will have the whip hand over the white man."
I can already hear the chorus of execration. How dare I say such a horrible thing? How dare I stir up trouble and inflame feelings by repeating such a conversation?

The answer is that I do not have the right not to do so. Here is a decent, ordinary fellow Englishman, who in broad daylight in my own town says to me, his Member of Parliament, that his country will not be worth living in for his children.

I simply do not have the right to shrug my shoulders and think about something else. What he is saying, thousands and hundreds of thousands are saying and thinking - not throughout Great Britain, perhaps, but in the areas that are already undergoing the total transformation to which there is no parallel in a thousand years of English history.

In 15 or 20 years, on present trends, there will be in this country three and a half million Commonwealth immigrants and their descendants. That is not my figure. That is the official figure given to parliament by the spokesman of the Registrar General's Office.
There is no comparable official figure for the year 2000, but it must be in the region of five to seven million, approximately one-tenth of the whole population, and approaching that of Greater London. Of course, it will not be evenly distributed from Margate to Aberystwyth and from Penzance to Aberdeen. Whole areas, towns and parts of towns across England will be occupied by sections of the immigrant and immigrant-descended population.

As time goes on, the proportion of this total who are immigrant descendants, those born in England, who arrived here by exactly the same route as the rest of us, will rapidly increase. Already by 1985 the native-born would constitute the majority. It is this fact which creates the extreme urgency of action now, of just that kind of action which is hardest for politicians to take, action where the difficulties lie in the present but the evils to be prevented or minimised lie several parliaments ahead.

The natural and rational first question with a nation confronted by such a prospect is to ask: "How can its dimensions be reduced?" Granted it be not wholly preventable, can it be limited, bearing in mind that numbers are of the essence: the significance and consequences of an alien element introduced into a country or population are profoundly different according to whether that element is 1 per cent or 10 per cent.

The answers to the simple and rational question are equally simple and rational: by stopping, or virtually stopping, further inflow, and by promoting the maximum outflow. Both answers are part of the official policy of the Conservative Party.

It almost passes belief that at this moment 20 or 30 additional immigrant children are arriving from overseas in Wolverhampton alone every week - and that means 15 or 20 additional families a decade or two hence. Those whom the gods wish to destroy, they first make mad. We must be mad, literally mad, as a nation to be permitting the annual inflow of some 50,000 dependants, who are for the most part the material of the future growth of the immigrant-descended population. It is like watching a nation busily engaged in heaping up its own funeral pyre. So insane are we that we actually permit unmarried persons to immigrate for the purpose of founding a family with spouses and fiancés whom they have never seen.

Let no one suppose that the flow of dependants will automatically tail off. On the contrary, even at the present admission rate of only 5,000 a year by voucher, there is sufficient for a further 25,000 dependants per annum ad infinitum, without taking into account the huge reservoir of existing relations in this country - and I am making no allowance at all for fraudulent entry. In these circumstances nothing will suffice but that the total inflow for settlement should be reduced at once to negligible proportions, and that the necessary legislative and administrative measures be taken without delay.

I stress the words "for settlement." This has nothing to do with the entry of Commonwealth citizens, any more than of aliens, into this country, for the purposes of study or of improving their qualifications, like (for instance) the Commonwealth doctors who, to the advantage of their own countries, have enabled our hospital service to be expanded faster than would otherwise have been possible. They are not, and never have been, immigrants.

I turn to re-emigration. If all immigration ended tomorrow, the rate of growth of the immigrant and immigrant-descended population would be substantially reduced, but the prospective size of this element in the population would still leave the basic character of the national danger unaffected. This can only be tackled while a considerable proportion of the total still comprises persons who entered this country during the last ten years or so.

Hence the urgency of implementing now the second element of the Conservative Party's policy: the encouragement of re-emigration.
Nobody can make an estimate of the numbers which, with generous assistance, would choose either to return to their countries of origin or to go to other countries anxious to receive the manpower and the skills they represent.

Nobody knows, because no such policy has yet been attempted. I can only say that, even at present, immigrants in my own constituency from time to time come to me, asking if I can find them assistance to return home. If such a policy were adopted and pursued with the determination which the gravity of the alternative justifies, the resultant outflow could appreciably alter the prospects.

The third element of the Conservative Party's policy is that all who are in this country as citizens should be equal before the law and that there shall be no discrimination or difference made between them by public authority. As Mr Heath has put it we will have no "first-class citizens" and "second-class citizens." This does not mean that the immigrant and his descendent should be elevated into a privileged or special class or that the citizen should be denied his right to discriminate in the management of his own affairs between one fellow-citizen and another or that he should be subjected to imposition as to his reasons and motive for behaving in one lawful manner rather than another.

There could be no grosser misconception of the realities than is entertained by those who vociferously demand legislation as they call it "against discrimination", whether they be leader-writers of the same kidney and sometimes on the same newspapers which year after year in the 1930s tried to blind this country to the rising peril which confronted it, or archbishops who live in palaces, faring delicately with the bedclothes pulled right up over their heads. They have got it exactly and diametrically wrong.

The discrimination and the deprivation, the sense of alarm and of resentment, lies not with the immigrant population but with those among whom they have come and are still coming.

This is why to enact legislation of the kind before parliament at this moment is to risk throwing a match on to gunpowder. The kindest thing that can be said about those who propose and support it is that they know not what they do.

Nothing is more misleading than comparison between the Commonwealth immigrant in Britain and the American Negro. The Negro population of the United States, which was already in existence before the United States became a nation, started literally as slaves and were later given the franchise and other rights of citizenship, to the exercise of which they have only gradually and still incompletely come. The Commonwealth immigrant came to Britain as a full citizen, to a country which knew no discrimination between one citizen and another, and he entered instantly into the possession of the rights of every citizen, from the vote to free treatment under the National Health Service.

Whatever drawbacks attended the immigrants arose not from the law or from public policy or from administration, but from those personal circumstances and accidents which cause, and always will cause, the fortunes and experience of one man to be different from another's.

But while, to the immigrant, entry to this country was admission to privileges and opportunities eagerly sought, the impact upon the existing population was very different. For reasons which they could not comprehend, and in pursuance of a decision by default, on which they were never consulted, they found themselves made strangers in their own country.

They found their wives unable to obtain hospital beds in childbirth, their children unable to obtain school places, their homes and neighbourhoods changed beyond recognition, their plans and prospects for the future defeated; at work they found that employers hesitated to apply to the immigrant worker the standards of discipline and competence required of the native-born worker; they began to hear, as time went by, more and more voices which told them that they were now the unwanted. They now learn that a one-way privilege is to be established by act of parliament; a law which cannot, and is not intended to, operate to protect them or redress their grievances is to be enacted to give the stranger, the disgruntled and the agent-provocateur the power to pillory them for their private actions.

In the hundreds upon hundreds of letters I received when I last spoke on this subject two or three months ago, there was one striking feature which was largely new and which I find ominous. All Members of Parliament are used to the typical anonymous correspondent; but what surprised and alarmed me was the high proportion of ordinary, decent, sensible people, writing a rational and often well-educated letter, who believed that they had to omit their address because it was dangerous to have committed themselves to paper to a Member of Parliament agreeing with the views I had expressed, and that they would risk penalties or reprisals if they were known to have done so. The sense of being a persecuted minority which is growing among ordinary English people in the areas of the country which are affected is something that those without direct experience can hardly imagine.

I am going to allow just one of those hundreds of people to speak for me:
“Eight years ago in a respectable street in Wolverhampton a house was sold to a Negro. Now only one white (a woman old-age pensioner) lives there. This is her story. She lost her husband and both her sons in the war. So she turned her seven-roomed house, her only asset, into a boarding house. She worked hard and did well, paid off her mortgage and began to put something by for her old age. Then the immigrants moved in. With growing fear, she saw one house after another taken over. The quiet street became a place of noise and confusion. Regretfully, her white tenants moved out
.
“The day after the last one left, she was awakened at 7am by two Negroes who wanted to use her 'phone to contact their employer. When she refused, as she would have refused any stranger at such an hour, she was abused and feared she would have been attacked but for the chain on her door. Immigrant families have tried to rent rooms in her house, but she always refused. Her little store of money went, and after paying rates, she has less than £2 per week. “She went to apply for a rate reduction and was seen by a young girl, who on hearing she had a seven-roomed house, suggested she should let part of it. When she said the only people she could get were Negroes, the girl said, "Racial prejudice won't get you anywhere in this country." So she went home.

“The telephone is her lifeline. Her family pay the bill, and help her out as best they can. Immigrants have offered to buy her house - at a price which the prospective landlord would be able to recover from his tenants in weeks, or at most a few months. She is becoming afraid to go out. Windows are broken. She finds excreta pushed through her letter box. When she goes to the shops, she is followed by children, charming, wide-grinning piccaninnies. They cannot speak English, but one word they know. "Racialist," they chant. When the new Race Relations Bill is passed, this woman is convinced she will go to prison. And is she so wrong? I begin to wonder.”

The other dangerous delusion from which those who are wilfully or otherwise blind to realities suffer, is summed up in the word "integration." To be integrated into a population means to become for all practical purposes indistinguishable from its other members.
Now, at all times, where there are marked physical differences, especially of colour, integration is difficult though, over a period, not impossible. There are among the Commonwealth immigrants who have come to live here in the last fifteen years or so, many thousands whose wish and purpose is to be integrated and whose every thought and endeavour is bent in that direction.

But to imagine that such a thing enters the heads of a great and growing majority of immigrants and their descendants is a ludicrous misconception, and a dangerous one.

We are on the verge here of a change. Hitherto it has been force of circumstance and of background which has rendered the very idea of integration inaccessible to the greater part of the immigrant population - that they never conceived or intended such a thing, and that their numbers and physical concentration meant the pressures towards integration which normally bear upon any small minority did not operate.

Now we are seeing the growth of positive forces acting against integration, of vested interests in the preservation and sharpening of racial and religious differences, with a view to the exercise of actual domination, first over fellow-immigrants and then over the rest of the population. The cloud no bigger than a man's hand, that can so rapidly overcast the sky, has been visible recently in Wolverhampton and has shown signs of spreading quickly. The words I am about to use, verbatim as they appeared in the local press on 17 February, are not mine, but those of a Labour Member of Parliament who is a minister in the present government:
'The Sikh communities' campaign to maintain customs inappropriate in Britain is much to be regretted. Working in Britain, particularly in the public services, they should be prepared to accept the terms and conditions of their employment. To claim special communal rights (or should one say rites?) leads to a dangerous fragmentation within society. This communalism is a canker; whether practised by one colour or another it is to be strongly condemned.'

All credit to John Stonehouse for having had the insight to perceive that, and the courage to say it.

For these dangerous and divisive elements the legislation proposed in the Race Relations Bill is the very pabulum they need to flourish. Here is the means of showing that the immigrant communities can organise to consolidate their members, to agitate and campaign against their fellow citizens, and to overawe and dominate the rest with the legal weapons which the ignorant and the ill-informed have provided. As I look ahead, I am filled with foreboding; like the Roman, I seem to see "the River Tiber foaming with much blood."
That tragic and intractable phenomenon which we watch with horror on the other side of the Atlantic but which there is interwoven with the history and existence of the States itself, is coming upon us here by our own volition and our own neglect. Indeed, it has all but come. In numerical terms, it will be of American proportions long before the end of the century.

Only resolute and urgent action will avert it even now. Whether there will be the public will to demand and obtain that action, I do not know. All I know is that to see, and not to speak, would be the great betrayal.

Link

 

[CougarKing]

In contrast to  what's reported below in the US, Mayor Gregor Robertson of Vancouver wants to bring in as many as 20,000 refugees by 2020? Where is he going to get the funding to support their resettlement here?  :facepalm:

Reuters

Obama wants U.S. to prepare for 10,000 Syrian refugees next year: White House
Thu Sep 10, 2015 1:23pm EDT
U.S. President Barack Obama waves as he walks from the Oval Office of the White House in Washington before their departure  September 9, 2015.  REUTERS/Yuri Gripas
1 of 1Full Size
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Barack Obama has directed his administration to prepare to take in at least 10,000 Syrian refugees next year, a White House spokesman said on Thursday.


(...SNIPPED)

 

[Jarnhamar]

German Girls Must Cover Arms and Legs to Appease Syrian “Refugees”

So many nonwhite invaders from the Middle East have entered Germany over the past few months that a school headmaster in Bavaria has been forced to ask female pupils to cover up their arms and legs—for their own protection against local Syrian “refugees.”

In a letter sent to parents, Martin Thalhammer, head of the Wilhelm-Diess-Gymnasium in the town of Pocking, Bavaria—which has a normal population of around 15,000—female pupils have been asked to refrain from wearing “revealing clothes” because “refugee accommodation” has been set up next to the school’s gym.

Someone should have had the backbone to tell them to GFT.

I watched a few videos this morning of refugees refusing Red Cross food because it wasn't Halal.  Guess lots of them didn't like the red cross either. They too, can GFT.

Everyone who posts online demanding we let these people in should be forced to provide room and board for them.

 

[George Wallace]

Driving home, listening to the politicians and political puntives talk about the "refugee/migrant crisis" and how "WE WERE RESPONSIBLE" and I asked myself:  Why are we responsible?  Why are we responsible for a mass migration of economic opportunists from the Middle East and Africa into Europe?  Are we responsible because we have worked hard to build our cultures and societies to be productive and relatively peaceful?  Are we responsible because we don't destroy everything in our sight without good cause, preferring to build for our betterment? 

The media seem to be focused on migrants from Syria, but the migrants are from Afghanistan, Iraq, Eritrea, Libya, and dozens of other African, Middle Eastern and South West Asian countries.  How some of them passed through IS controlled nations would be an interesting question to ask. 

But the main question is: "Why are WE responsible?"

 

[George Wallace]

How much more convoluted can this one story get.

At beginning of the week, we see photos (staged photos indicated from another source) of a drown child.  We hear from the child's aunt in Vancouver the sad tale of the family being thrown into the water when their boat capsized; how the father tried to save his two sons but they both drown.  The tale how the aunt was sponsoring another brother to come to Canada, while also sending this one money.  How this man had no teeth so he was desperate to get to Sweden (or Finland) as they had free Dental Care.  Other stories of how this man was working for two years in Turkey and brought his family to join him when bombs started falling on their hometown.  The story just kept on going.

Now we have this Bovine Scatoloy in the Globe and Mail:

Reproduced under the Fair Dealings provisions of the Copyright Act.

Drowned Syrian migrant boy’s father says he blames Canada for tragedy
The Canadian Press
Published Thursday, Sep. 10, 2015 3:52PM EDT
Last updated Thursday, Sep. 10, 2015 8:08PM EDT

The father of a three-year-old Syrian boy whose body washed up on a Turkish beach has told a German newspaper that he blames Canadian authorities for the tragedy that also killed his wife and another son.

Abdullah Kurdi told Die Welt that he does not understand why Canada rejected his application for asylum, although Citizenship and Immigration Canada received no such application from the man.

“I wanted to move (to Canada) with my family and with my brother who is currently in Germany,” Kurdi told Die Welt in a telephone interview. “But they denied us permission and I don’t know why.”

When Die Welt asked Kurdi whether he blamed anyone for the tragedy, he responded: “Yes, the authorities in Canada, which rejected my application for asylum, even though there were five families who were willing to support us financially.”

Citizenship and Immigration received an application for Kurdi’s brother, Mohammed, but said it was incomplete and did not meet regulatory requirements for proof of refugee status recognition.

Kurdi’s sister, Tima, who lives in Coquitlam, B.C., has said that she only submitted an application for Mohammed. She intended to sponsor him, and subsequently to apply to sponsor Abdullah Kurdi and his young family as well.

In the meantime, she said, she also sent Abdullah Kurdi money to pay for the perilous maritime journey from Turkey to Greece.

Although no official application was made for Abdullah, Tima Kurdi said his plight was brought to the attention of Immigration Minister Chris Alexander when her local NDP MP handed over a letter to him in the House of Commons earlier this year.


The fact that the Kurdis encountered red tape in their attempts to come to Canada has shone an international spotlight on the country.

Last week, as the world’s media relayed images of the lifeless boy, many outlets on different continents noted the Canadian connection to the tragic story.

A headline across Italy’s La Repubblica website quoted Abdullah Kurdi as saying: “I don’t want asylum in Canada anymore — I’ll take my son back to Kobani.”

Abdullah Kurdi said he had been working in Turkey for two years when the bombs began to rain down on his hometown of Kobani, where his wife and two sons were still living.

“I brought them to Turkey and that is where my tragedy began,” he told Die Welt.

The Kurdi boys — Alan, 3, and five-year-old Ghalib — and their mother were among at least 12 migrants, including five children, who drowned Sept. 2 when two boats carrying them to the Greek island of Kos capsized.

More on LINK



Sorry, but I find this whole convoluted story to be BS, and I don't want liars (and I consider Liars as thieves who have stolen my trust) to be brought into my country.  Our quota is already more than full.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Driving home, listening to the politicians and political puntives talk about the "refugee/migrant crisis" and how "WE WERE RESPONSIBLE" and I asked myself:  Why are we responsible?  Why are we responsible for a mass migration of economic opportunists from the Middle East and Africa into Europe?  Are we responsible because we have worked hard to build our cultures and societies to be productive and relatively peaceful?  Are we responsible because we don't destroy everything in our sight without good cause, preferring to build for our betterment? 

The media seem to be focused on migrants from Syria, but the migrants are from Afghanistan, Iraq, Eritrea, Libya, and dozens of other African, Middle Eastern and South West Asian countries.  How some of them passed through IS controlled nations would be an interesting question to ask. 

But the main question is: "Why are WE responsible?"

We are not responsible. We are not beholden, by guilt, to do one single thing about this 'exodus'.

Once the homeless, destitute, sick, jobless and aged people in this country, including Veterans, are taken care of, then perhaps we can see what we can help with.

I refuse to carry any sort of 'white man's guilt' for things that happened before I was born or I had no control over. Whether that's people from the ME, Japanese Canadians, Aboriginals or any other race or religion.

We owe these people fleeing Syria (and Pakistan, Egypt, Sudan to name a few more mixed in with this current influx) nada.

I'm waiting until some bleeding heart in some town, here, takes in a couple of these poor young men and is horrified when they turn the basement into a bomb factory.

 

[George Wallace]

Pretty much my sentiments as well.

 

[larry Strong]

Now we have this Bovine Scatoloy in the Globe and Mail:

Reproduced under the Fair Dealings provisions of the Copyright Act.

More on LINK

What a crock............I watched the video of the sister telling about the teeth....funny how that is never mentioned.....



Cheers
Larry

 

[a_majoor]

My sympathy for the child, but most certainly not for the father. I hope we ensure that this disgusting human being NEVER arrives in Canada under any circumstances:

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/in-depth/europes-migrant-crisis/migrant-crisis-father-of-dead-toddler-a-people-smuggler/story-fnws9k7b-1227523338355

Migrant crisis: father of dead toddler a ‘people smuggler’
AAP|
September 11, 2015 8:35PM|

A woman on the same boat as Alan Kurdi says the boy’s father is a people smuggler who begged her not to dob him in.

Zainab Abbas said Abdullah Kurdi had lied to the world after the image of his dead three-year-old son on a Turkish beach sparked a global outpouring of support for Syrian refugees.

“Yes, it was Abdullah Kurdi driving the boat,” Ms Abbas told Network Ten through her cousin Lara Tahseen today.

Ms Abbas also lost two children when the boat capsized shortly after leaving Bodrum for the Greek islands.

After the tragedy, Mr Kurdi told the media he took over steering the boat after the captain panicked and jumped ship.

But Ms Abbas said Mr Kurdi was the driver of the boat, and the man she paid to book her passage told her it would be safe because the driver was taking his wife and two children.

“When I lost my kids, I lost my life, how can he lie to the media?” her cousin Ms Tahseen said, translating for Ms Abbas.

“He said, ‘Please don’t dob me in.’ That was in the water.”

Ms Abbas said Mr Kurdi was speeding in the overcrowded boat, which did not have enough life jackets.

She said her husband told him to be careful just before the boat capsized, reportedly killing at least 12 people.

Ms Abbas is now in Iraq and her family has called on the federal government to include them in the 12,000 refugees Australia has pledged to take in.

Liberal senator Cory Bernardi came under fire this week, particularly from the Greens, for suggesting the Kurdi family had not fled Syria recently.

Senator Bernardi accused some “opportunistic” Syrians of seeking asylum in the West when they are “very safely ensconced” in the Middle East.

The Coalition and Labor have rejected any suggestion Syrian or Iraqi asylum-seekers in Nauru or Manus Island detention be included in the extra 12,000 refugee places because it could “spring the lock” on people-smuggling to Australia.

Prime Minister Tony Abbott has ruled out taking in Syrians or Iraqis who are being held for offshore processing, because there was “a world of difference” between the people in camps on the border of Syria and “people who have done a deal with people-smugglers to go way beyond the country of first asylum”.

“We will never, ever do anything that encourages the evil trade of people-smuggling and all of those who have come to Australia by boat are here as a result of people-smuggling and this is the selfsame trade which resulted in the deaths of more than 1000 people at sea in the waters to our north and has currently resulted in the deaths of perhaps many, many more thousands in the Mediterranean,” the Prime Minister said in Port Moresby.