Refugee crisis

[sexbelowsound]

Using religion as a reason why someone should or shouldn't be able to come here is wrong. 

Its made up nonsense and if we're being completely honest England isn't originally a Christian country either. As long as the people who come are good people then who gives a shit. 

Not Morgan Freeman, thats for sure.

[sexbelowsound]

 

If I'd go back 1,5-2 years in your posting history, would I find posts where you'd call europeans to bring in ukranian refugees from the Crimea and Ukraine when Russians invaded Crimea?

 

 

I have no idea. I don't think I discussed the situation much on here. You certainly wouldn't see me opposing it.

But I don't see the relevance of that question. 

If I'm not opposed to Syrian refugees, why would I be opposed to Ukrainian ones?

I don't see what you're getting at. I have a feeling you don't either.

I've seen so many people spouting how europe needs to bring in all those poor middle-easterns in here and how they need to be helped, and how we need to show solidarity yada yada, just to show that they're supposedly "so progressive" and/or "so good people", but the same people were so **** quiet when there was that earthquake in nepal six months ago, and it didn't get nearly the same attention in the media.

I find those people to be utter hypocrites, if they'd really be such a good people they would've raised the same storm that european states need to bring in refugees from Nepal and pressured the european states to give much more humanitarian aid to the Nepal to bring them back up.

Same goes for the Ukraine in 2014 when the rebels started to fight in Ukraine and Russians invaded Crimea, sure it got media attention and it was followed by the news but I didn't see anyone saying how we need to bring in the Ukranian refugees from Crimea or Ukraine to the europe.

I was poking to see if you are one of those hypocrties, as so many others are, when the next big crisis starts somewhere in the world, I trust you to call out EU to bring the refugees in, as you are calling in to welcome the current migrants.

About the current refugee/migrant situation and the Ukranian crisis:

The news stories were much more carefully worded and the same leftist and "progressive" journalists/media who are now crying about the poor down-trodden syrian (or "syrian", depending who you believe) refugees (or "refugees", depending on who you believe), and anyone who questions them is a **** right-wing neo-nazi racist, made it so **** sure that there's not a single one of those "human interest" stories or photographs of the children in the battlefields to garner sympathy for the Ukranians, also I didn't see any stories how the ukranians' familes were broken, or how their lives are ruined due the warzones where the rebels and russians started to fight, at least not in the single one of the finnish news sites nor in the international european media I saw.

Neither I saw any interviews from the Ukranian refugee camps, or footage shown how utter shit are the conditions in the said camps.

Just so that you don't think I like conservative and/or right-wing media any better, I don't. They are equally manipulative and hypocritical as the leftie/"progressive" ones.

I just want even a single impartial and neutral news media who will just report the **** news without **** editorializing and trying to affect the public opinion toward the causes/people/politics they themselves hold or agree with, the finnish equivalent for BBC, Yle, used to be like that but now they've gone more and more toward the left from the impartial/centre.

Disclaimer: I used "crying about the poor down-trodden" just to show how differently the media depicts the Syrian and Ukranian conflicts, and Nepal disaster, I think all of those three things are pretty much equally horrible events, and the people who would need our aid, should get it.

What a load of utter, utter shite.

 

You've wandered way off the original conversation and appear to be trying to construct some strange argument against the media with me as some sort of leverage, based on me not announcing my calls for refugee acceptance at every disaster/warzone that there has ever been. It's so convoluted I don't even know where to start in reply.

Fwiw, my mother is an immigrant, so my stance on immigration has been pretty consistent for my whole life. If you want to trawl through my posting history then go right ahead, I'll leave you to it for now.

Not disrespect chap, but the sentance above explains everyone of your posts on here, an I do mean no disrepect. But to start, your a gonna be a little biased on Camerons latest immigration/refugee policy. Also what I have seen from your posts is alot of backing on letting all the refugees into our country but no real positives we may reap from it. So how is gonna help us letting another 10000+ into our small over populated island, because even though I am not opposed to immigration, I cannot see many postives to allowing more to settle here.

Small, over populated island? You being funny with that?

[Stevo985]

 

If I'd go back 1,5-2 years in your posting history, would I find posts where you'd call europeans to bring in ukranian refugees from the Crimea and Ukraine when Russians invaded Crimea?

 

 

I have no idea. I don't think I discussed the situation much on here. You certainly wouldn't see me opposing it.

But I don't see the relevance of that question. 

If I'm not opposed to Syrian refugees, why would I be opposed to Ukrainian ones?

I don't see what you're getting at. I have a feeling you don't either.

I've seen so many people spouting how europe needs to bring in all those poor middle-easterns in here and how they need to be helped, and how we need to show solidarity yada yada, just to show that they're supposedly "so progressive" and/or "so good people", but the same people were so **** quiet when there was that earthquake in nepal six months ago, and it didn't get nearly the same attention in the media.

I find those people to be utter hypocrites, if they'd really be such a good people they would've raised the same storm that european states need to bring in refugees from Nepal and pressured the european states to give much more humanitarian aid to the Nepal to bring them back up.

Same goes for the Ukraine in 2014 when the rebels started to fight in Ukraine and Russians invaded Crimea, sure it got media attention and it was followed by the news but I didn't see anyone saying how we need to bring in the Ukranian refugees from Crimea or Ukraine to the europe.

I was poking to see if you are one of those hypocrties, as so many others are, when the next big crisis starts somewhere in the world, I trust you to call out EU to bring the refugees in, as you are calling in to welcome the current migrants.

About the current refugee/migrant situation and the Ukranian crisis:

The news stories were much more carefully worded and the same leftist and "progressive" journalists/media who are now crying about the poor down-trodden syrian (or "syrian", depending who you believe) refugees (or "refugees", depending on who you believe), and anyone who questions them is a **** right-wing neo-nazi racist, made it so **** sure that there's not a single one of those "human interest" stories or photographs of the children in the battlefields to garner sympathy for the Ukranians, also I didn't see any stories how the ukranians' familes were broken, or how their lives are ruined due the warzones where the rebels and russians started to fight, at least not in the single one of the finnish news sites nor in the international european media I saw.

Neither I saw any interviews from the Ukranian refugee camps, or footage shown how utter shit are the conditions in the said camps.

Just so that you don't think I like conservative and/or right-wing media any better, I don't. They are equally manipulative and hypocritical as the leftie/"progressive" ones.

I just want even a single impartial and neutral news media who will just report the **** news without **** editorializing and trying to affect the public opinion toward the causes/people/politics they themselves hold or agree with, the finnish equivalent for BBC, Yle, used to be like that but now they've gone more and more toward the left from the impartial/centre.

Disclaimer: I used "crying about the poor down-trodden" just to show how differently the media depicts the Syrian and Ukranian conflicts, and Nepal disaster, I think all of those three things are pretty much equally horrible events, and the people who would need our aid, should get it.

What a load of utter, utter shite.

 

You've wandered way off the original conversation and appear to be trying to construct some strange argument against the media with me as some sort of leverage, based on me not announcing my calls for refugee acceptance at every disaster/warzone that there has ever been. It's so convoluted I don't even know where to start in reply.

Fwiw, my mother is an immigrant, so my stance on immigration has been pretty consistent for my whole life. If you want to trawl through my posting history then go right ahead, I'll leave you to it for now.

Not disrespect chap, but the sentance above explains everyone of your posts on here, an I do mean no disrepect. But to start, your a gonna be a little biased on Camerons latest immigration/refugee policy. Also what I have seen from your posts is alot of backing on letting all the refugees into our country but no real positives we may reap from it. So how is gonna help us letting another 10000+ into our small over populated island, because even though I am not opposed to immigration, I cannot see many postives to allowing more to settle here.

Is saving people from a warzone not a positive?

Do we just say "nah, soz. Don't see how this is going to help us so see ya later."?

 

What a strange argument.

because this is NOT an islamic country. we would not get away with filling any city in the middle east with our lot, we cant even build churches over there but mosques are flying up like its the new fashion over here. if anyone thinks its acceptable to have a muslim,sikh or even a fully white city then thats complete bullshit.

This isn't an Islamic country. What difference does that make?

India isn't a Christian country but there are areas of it that are 90% Christian. What's the difference?

 

There are plenty of "our lot" in the middle east. They don't fill cities but they're there. There's plenty of churches too. 

compare christianity in the muslim world to islam in the western world, dont need to say much more.

You'll have to say more because your sentence means nothing.

[Rugeley Villa]

Using religion as a reason why someone should or shouldn't be able to come here is wrong. 

Its made up nonsense and if we're being completely honest England isn't originally a Christian country either. As long as the people who come are good people then who gives a shit. 

Not Morgan Freeman, thats for sure.

if they add something and dont preach backward views then they are more than welcome in my book but we cant always keep letting them in.

Edited September 10, 2015 by Rugeley Villa

[Rugeley Villa]

because this is NOT an islamic country. we would not get away with filling any city in the middle east with our lot, we cant even build churches over there but mosques are flying up like its the new fashion over here. if anyone thinks its acceptable to have a muslim,sikh or even a fully white city then thats complete bullshit.

Some of us don't want anyone building churches "over here" nor any other taxpayer funded superstitious bollocks.

im not a church man myself but i was just pointing out.

I'm not really sure what your point is though. What difference does the religion of refugees make? Either they are refugees or they aren't. Or did you forget which thread you were in?

was just pointing out my argument comparing both religions at the moment as we are having a stream of muslim refugees to which will in my view create more tension and negative affect on our country.

[tonyh29]

I think what's interesting is the sort of "British" Islam that develops; in our society, we're moving more and more in the direction where the young are less religious than their parents, who were less religious than their parents. Exposure to news and media and alternatives and different lifestyles and understanding the similarities with the non-muslims they see at school (and vice versa) makes people that little bit less convinced of their faith I think. In the same way that there are lapsed, or buffet catholics, I think we're seeing the same in Muslim communities, especially amongst the women. I think that's quite positive and I would hope we'll become a more and more secular society of people who come from wherever.

The thing that's pushing young people and particularly young muslims away from that drift is the media projection of the muslim menace - by adding peril and danger, and giving people something to defend, we encourage them to become more devout and in a society that's headed the other way, they stick out even more than would usually be the case.

The key to changing Islam (and religious attitudes across all faiths) is to remember that religion isn't really important, it doesn't define people, it shouldn't bind them into communities. Ignore, mix and dissipate.

 

 

 

good post but I'd possibly argue that religion does define people .. Ok VT is a hot bed of atheists but religious influence is everywhere even if we don't believe in the grey haired man with a beard in the sky 

 

our influences tend to define us ... If you read the guardian you are likely to wear tweed , if you vote Tory your likely to eat babies etc etc  but it still defines us 

 

[sexbelowsound]

I've lived in London and worked in a school in one of the poorest areas of the country for 8 years now. I work with, teach and interact with Muslims every single day and i'm yet to meet one who doesn't offer something or who has backwards views.

In fact I've met more English people with backwards views who offer little to society in my time than I have Muslims.

Edited September 11, 2015 by sexbelowsound

[foreveryoung]

 

If I'd go back 1,5-2 years in your posting history, would I find posts where you'd call europeans to bring in ukranian refugees from the Crimea and Ukraine when Russians invaded Crimea?

 

 

I have no idea. I don't think I discussed the situation much on here. You certainly wouldn't see me opposing it.

But I don't see the relevance of that question. 

If I'm not opposed to Syrian refugees, why would I be opposed to Ukrainian ones?

I don't see what you're getting at. I have a feeling you don't either.

I've seen so many people spouting how europe needs to bring in all those poor middle-easterns in here and how they need to be helped, and how we need to show solidarity yada yada, just to show that they're supposedly "so progressive" and/or "so good people", but the same people were so **** quiet when there was that earthquake in nepal six months ago, and it didn't get nearly the same attention in the media.

I find those people to be utter hypocrites, if they'd really be such a good people they would've raised the same storm that european states need to bring in refugees from Nepal and pressured the european states to give much more humanitarian aid to the Nepal to bring them back up.

Same goes for the Ukraine in 2014 when the rebels started to fight in Ukraine and Russians invaded Crimea, sure it got media attention and it was followed by the news but I didn't see anyone saying how we need to bring in the Ukranian refugees from Crimea or Ukraine to the europe.

I was poking to see if you are one of those hypocrties, as so many others are, when the next big crisis starts somewhere in the world, I trust you to call out EU to bring the refugees in, as you are calling in to welcome the current migrants.

About the current refugee/migrant situation and the Ukranian crisis:

The news stories were much more carefully worded and the same leftist and "progressive" journalists/media who are now crying about the poor down-trodden syrian (or "syrian", depending who you believe) refugees (or "refugees", depending on who you believe), and anyone who questions them is a **** right-wing neo-nazi racist, made it so **** sure that there's not a single one of those "human interest" stories or photographs of the children in the battlefields to garner sympathy for the Ukranians, also I didn't see any stories how the ukranians' familes were broken, or how their lives are ruined due the warzones where the rebels and russians started to fight, at least not in the single one of the finnish news sites nor in the international european media I saw.

Neither I saw any interviews from the Ukranian refugee camps, or footage shown how utter shit are the conditions in the said camps.

Just so that you don't think I like conservative and/or right-wing media any better, I don't. They are equally manipulative and hypocritical as the leftie/"progressive" ones.

I just want even a single impartial and neutral news media who will just report the **** news without **** editorializing and trying to affect the public opinion toward the causes/people/politics they themselves hold or agree with, the finnish equivalent for BBC, Yle, used to be like that but now they've gone more and more toward the left from the impartial/centre.

Disclaimer: I used "crying about the poor down-trodden" just to show how differently the media depicts the Syrian and Ukranian conflicts, and Nepal disaster, I think all of those three things are pretty much equally horrible events, and the people who would need our aid, should get it.

What a load of utter, utter shite.

 

You've wandered way off the original conversation and appear to be trying to construct some strange argument against the media with me as some sort of leverage, based on me not announcing my calls for refugee acceptance at every disaster/warzone that there has ever been. It's so convoluted I don't even know where to start in reply.

Fwiw, my mother is an immigrant, so my stance on immigration has been pretty consistent for my whole life. If you want to trawl through my posting history then go right ahead, I'll leave you to it for now.

Not disrespect chap, but the sentance above explains everyone of your posts on here, an I do mean no disrepect. But to start, your a gonna be a little biased on Camerons latest immigration/refugee policy. Also what I have seen from your posts is alot of backing on letting all the refugees into our country but no real positives we may reap from it. So how is gonna help us letting another 10000+ into our small over populated island, because even though I am not opposed to immigration, I cannot see many postives to allowing more to settle here.

Is saving people from a warzone not a positive?

Do we just say "nah, soz. Don't see how this is going to help us so see ya later."?

 

What a strange argument.

Its a positive maybe yeah. So should you think we should que them up at our borders? Take a million maybe?

[Rugeley Villa]

 

If I'd go back 1,5-2 years in your posting history, would I find posts where you'd call europeans to bring in ukranian refugees from the Crimea and Ukraine when Russians invaded Crimea?

 

 

I have no idea. I don't think I discussed the situation much on here. You certainly wouldn't see me opposing it.

But I don't see the relevance of that question. 

If I'm not opposed to Syrian refugees, why would I be opposed to Ukrainian ones?

I don't see what you're getting at. I have a feeling you don't either.

I've seen so many people spouting how europe needs to bring in all those poor middle-easterns in here and how they need to be helped, and how we need to show solidarity yada yada, just to show that they're supposedly "so progressive" and/or "so good people", but the same people were so **** quiet when there was that earthquake in nepal six months ago, and it didn't get nearly the same attention in the media.

I find those people to be utter hypocrites, if they'd really be such a good people they would've raised the same storm that european states need to bring in refugees from Nepal and pressured the european states to give much more humanitarian aid to the Nepal to bring them back up.

Same goes for the Ukraine in 2014 when the rebels started to fight in Ukraine and Russians invaded Crimea, sure it got media attention and it was followed by the news but I didn't see anyone saying how we need to bring in the Ukranian refugees from Crimea or Ukraine to the europe.

I was poking to see if you are one of those hypocrties, as so many others are, when the next big crisis starts somewhere in the world, I trust you to call out EU to bring the refugees in, as you are calling in to welcome the current migrants.

About the current refugee/migrant situation and the Ukranian crisis:

The news stories were much more carefully worded and the same leftist and "progressive" journalists/media who are now crying about the poor down-trodden syrian (or "syrian", depending who you believe) refugees (or "refugees", depending on who you believe), and anyone who questions them is a **** right-wing neo-nazi racist, made it so **** sure that there's not a single one of those "human interest" stories or photographs of the children in the battlefields to garner sympathy for the Ukranians, also I didn't see any stories how the ukranians' familes were broken, or how their lives are ruined due the warzones where the rebels and russians started to fight, at least not in the single one of the finnish news sites nor in the international european media I saw.

Neither I saw any interviews from the Ukranian refugee camps, or footage shown how utter shit are the conditions in the said camps.

Just so that you don't think I like conservative and/or right-wing media any better, I don't. They are equally manipulative and hypocritical as the leftie/"progressive" ones.

I just want even a single impartial and neutral news media who will just report the **** news without **** editorializing and trying to affect the public opinion toward the causes/people/politics they themselves hold or agree with, the finnish equivalent for BBC, Yle, used to be like that but now they've gone more and more toward the left from the impartial/centre.

Disclaimer: I used "crying about the poor down-trodden" just to show how differently the media depicts the Syrian and Ukranian conflicts, and Nepal disaster, I think all of those three things are pretty much equally horrible events, and the people who would need our aid, should get it.

What a load of utter, utter shite.

 

You've wandered way off the original conversation and appear to be trying to construct some strange argument against the media with me as some sort of leverage, based on me not announcing my calls for refugee acceptance at every disaster/warzone that there has ever been. It's so convoluted I don't even know where to start in reply.

Fwiw, my mother is an immigrant, so my stance on immigration has been pretty consistent for my whole life. If you want to trawl through my posting history then go right ahead, I'll leave you to it for now.

Not disrespect chap, but the sentance above explains everyone of your posts on here, an I do mean no disrepect. But to start, your a gonna be a little biased on Camerons latest immigration/refugee policy. Also what I have seen from your posts is alot of backing on letting all the refugees into our country but no real positives we may reap from it. So how is gonna help us letting another 10000+ into our small over populated island, because even though I am not opposed to immigration, I cannot see many postives to allowing more to settle here.

Is saving people from a warzone not a positive?

Do we just say "nah, soz. Don't see how this is going to help us so see ya later."?

 

What a strange argument.

because this is NOT an islamic country. we would not get away with filling any city in the middle east with our lot, we cant even build churches over there but mosques are flying up like its the new fashion over here. if anyone thinks its acceptable to have a muslim,sikh or even a fully white city then thats complete bullshit.

This isn't an Islamic country. What difference does that make?

India isn't a Christian country but there are areas of it that are 90% Christian. What's the difference?

 

There are plenty of "our lot" in the middle east. They don't fill cities but they're there. There's plenty of churches too. 

compare christianity in the muslim world to islam in the western world, dont need to say much more.

You'll have to say more because your sentence means nothing.

im saying more muslim immigrants will have mostly a negative affect on this country and we could do without it as we are way behind sorting the ones we already have out, yes helping people out during war is helpful and the good thing to do but we can only do so much and we cant keep letting folk in.

[Stevo985]

 

If I'd go back 1,5-2 years in your posting history, would I find posts where you'd call europeans to bring in ukranian refugees from the Crimea and Ukraine when Russians invaded Crimea?

 

 

I have no idea. I don't think I discussed the situation much on here. You certainly wouldn't see me opposing it.

But I don't see the relevance of that question. 

If I'm not opposed to Syrian refugees, why would I be opposed to Ukrainian ones?

I don't see what you're getting at. I have a feeling you don't either.

I've seen so many people spouting how europe needs to bring in all those poor middle-easterns in here and how they need to be helped, and how we need to show solidarity yada yada, just to show that they're supposedly "so progressive" and/or "so good people", but the same people were so **** quiet when there was that earthquake in nepal six months ago, and it didn't get nearly the same attention in the media.

I find those people to be utter hypocrites, if they'd really be such a good people they would've raised the same storm that european states need to bring in refugees from Nepal and pressured the european states to give much more humanitarian aid to the Nepal to bring them back up.

Same goes for the Ukraine in 2014 when the rebels started to fight in Ukraine and Russians invaded Crimea, sure it got media attention and it was followed by the news but I didn't see anyone saying how we need to bring in the Ukranian refugees from Crimea or Ukraine to the europe.

I was poking to see if you are one of those hypocrties, as so many others are, when the next big crisis starts somewhere in the world, I trust you to call out EU to bring the refugees in, as you are calling in to welcome the current migrants.

About the current refugee/migrant situation and the Ukranian crisis:

The news stories were much more carefully worded and the same leftist and "progressive" journalists/media who are now crying about the poor down-trodden syrian (or "syrian", depending who you believe) refugees (or "refugees", depending on who you believe), and anyone who questions them is a **** right-wing neo-nazi racist, made it so **** sure that there's not a single one of those "human interest" stories or photographs of the children in the battlefields to garner sympathy for the Ukranians, also I didn't see any stories how the ukranians' familes were broken, or how their lives are ruined due the warzones where the rebels and russians started to fight, at least not in the single one of the finnish news sites nor in the international european media I saw.

Neither I saw any interviews from the Ukranian refugee camps, or footage shown how utter shit are the conditions in the said camps.

Just so that you don't think I like conservative and/or right-wing media any better, I don't. They are equally manipulative and hypocritical as the leftie/"progressive" ones.

I just want even a single impartial and neutral news media who will just report the **** news without **** editorializing and trying to affect the public opinion toward the causes/people/politics they themselves hold or agree with, the finnish equivalent for BBC, Yle, used to be like that but now they've gone more and more toward the left from the impartial/centre.

Disclaimer: I used "crying about the poor down-trodden" just to show how differently the media depicts the Syrian and Ukranian conflicts, and Nepal disaster, I think all of those three things are pretty much equally horrible events, and the people who would need our aid, should get it.

What a load of utter, utter shite.

 

You've wandered way off the original conversation and appear to be trying to construct some strange argument against the media with me as some sort of leverage, based on me not announcing my calls for refugee acceptance at every disaster/warzone that there has ever been. It's so convoluted I don't even know where to start in reply.

Fwiw, my mother is an immigrant, so my stance on immigration has been pretty consistent for my whole life. If you want to trawl through my posting history then go right ahead, I'll leave you to it for now.

Not disrespect chap, but the sentance above explains everyone of your posts on here, an I do mean no disrepect. But to start, your a gonna be a little biased on Camerons latest immigration/refugee policy. Also what I have seen from your posts is alot of backing on letting all the refugees into our country but no real positives we may reap from it. So how is gonna help us letting another 10000+ into our small over populated island, because even though I am not opposed to immigration, I cannot see many postives to allowing more to settle here.

Is saving people from a warzone not a positive?

Do we just say "nah, soz. Don't see how this is going to help us so see ya later."?

 

What a strange argument.

Its a positive maybe yeah. So should you think we should que them up at our borders? Take a million maybe?

Nope. I don't think that. Why would I?

You've jumped from 10,000 to a million.

[Stevo985]

 

im saying more muslim immigrants will have mostly a negative affect on this country and we could do without it as we are way behind sorting the ones we already have out, yes helping people out during war is helpful and the good thing to do but we can only do so much and we cant keep letting folk in.

Why would it have a negative effect on this country?

[foreveryoung]

 

If I'd go back 1,5-2 years in your posting history, would I find posts where you'd call europeans to bring in ukranian refugees from the Crimea and Ukraine when Russians invaded Crimea?

 

 

I have no idea. I don't think I discussed the situation much on here. You certainly wouldn't see me opposing it.

But I don't see the relevance of that question. 

If I'm not opposed to Syrian refugees, why would I be opposed to Ukrainian ones?

I don't see what you're getting at. I have a feeling you don't either.

I've seen so many people spouting how europe needs to bring in all those poor middle-easterns in here and how they need to be helped, and how we need to show solidarity yada yada, just to show that they're supposedly "so progressive" and/or "so good people", but the same people were so **** quiet when there was that earthquake in nepal six months ago, and it didn't get nearly the same attention in the media.

I find those people to be utter hypocrites, if they'd really be such a good people they would've raised the same storm that european states need to bring in refugees from Nepal and pressured the european states to give much more humanitarian aid to the Nepal to bring them back up.

Same goes for the Ukraine in 2014 when the rebels started to fight in Ukraine and Russians invaded Crimea, sure it got media attention and it was followed by the news but I didn't see anyone saying how we need to bring in the Ukranian refugees from Crimea or Ukraine to the europe.

I was poking to see if you are one of those hypocrties, as so many others are, when the next big crisis starts somewhere in the world, I trust you to call out EU to bring the refugees in, as you are calling in to welcome the current migrants.

About the current refugee/migrant situation and the Ukranian crisis:

The news stories were much more carefully worded and the same leftist and "progressive" journalists/media who are now crying about the poor down-trodden syrian (or "syrian", depending who you believe) refugees (or "refugees", depending on who you believe), and anyone who questions them is a **** right-wing neo-nazi racist, made it so **** sure that there's not a single one of those "human interest" stories or photographs of the children in the battlefields to garner sympathy for the Ukranians, also I didn't see any stories how the ukranians' familes were broken, or how their lives are ruined due the warzones where the rebels and russians started to fight, at least not in the single one of the finnish news sites nor in the international european media I saw.

Neither I saw any interviews from the Ukranian refugee camps, or footage shown how utter shit are the conditions in the said camps.

Just so that you don't think I like conservative and/or right-wing media any better, I don't. They are equally manipulative and hypocritical as the leftie/"progressive" ones.

I just want even a single impartial and neutral news media who will just report the **** news without **** editorializing and trying to affect the public opinion toward the causes/people/politics they themselves hold or agree with, the finnish equivalent for BBC, Yle, used to be like that but now they've gone more and more toward the left from the impartial/centre.

Disclaimer: I used "crying about the poor down-trodden" just to show how differently the media depicts the Syrian and Ukranian conflicts, and Nepal disaster, I think all of those three things are pretty much equally horrible events, and the people who would need our aid, should get it.

What a load of utter, utter shite.

 

You've wandered way off the original conversation and appear to be trying to construct some strange argument against the media with me as some sort of leverage, based on me not announcing my calls for refugee acceptance at every disaster/warzone that there has ever been. It's so convoluted I don't even know where to start in reply.

Fwiw, my mother is an immigrant, so my stance on immigration has been pretty consistent for my whole life. If you want to trawl through my posting history then go right ahead, I'll leave you to it for now.

Not disrespect chap, but the sentance above explains everyone of your posts on here, an I do mean no disrepect. But to start, your a gonna be a little biased on Camerons latest immigration/refugee policy. Also what I have seen from your posts is alot of backing on letting all the refugees into our country but no real positives we may reap from it. So how is gonna help us letting another 10000+ into our small over populated island, because even though I am not opposed to immigration, I cannot see many postives to allowing more to settle here.

Is saving people from a warzone not a positive?

Do we just say "nah, soz. Don't see how this is going to help us so see ya later."?

 

What a strange argument.

Its a positive maybe yeah. So should you think we should que them up at our borders? Take a million maybe?

Nope. I don't think that. Why would I?

You've jumped from 10,000 to a million.

I just wondered how far your sympathy for the refugess would stretch.

[villakram]

 

If I'd go back 1,5-2 years in your posting history, would I find posts where you'd call europeans to bring in ukranian refugees from the Crimea and Ukraine when Russians invaded Crimea?

 

 

I have no idea. I don't think I discussed the situation much on here. You certainly wouldn't see me opposing it.

But I don't see the relevance of that question. 

If I'm not opposed to Syrian refugees, why would I be opposed to Ukrainian ones?

I don't see what you're getting at. I have a feeling you don't either.

I've seen so many people spouting how europe needs to bring in all those poor middle-easterns in here and how they need to be helped, and how we need to show solidarity yada yada, just to show that they're supposedly "so progressive" and/or "so good people", but the same people were so **** quiet when there was that earthquake in nepal six months ago, and it didn't get nearly the same attention in the media.

I find those people to be utter hypocrites, if they'd really be such a good people they would've raised the same storm that european states need to bring in refugees from Nepal and pressured the european states to give much more humanitarian aid to the Nepal to bring them back up.

Same goes for the Ukraine in 2014 when the rebels started to fight in Ukraine and Russians invaded Crimea, sure it got media attention and it was followed by the news but I didn't see anyone saying how we need to bring in the Ukranian refugees from Crimea or Ukraine to the europe.

I was poking to see if you are one of those hypocrties, as so many others are, when the next big crisis starts somewhere in the world, I trust you to call out EU to bring the refugees in, as you are calling in to welcome the current migrants.

About the current refugee/migrant situation and the Ukranian crisis:

The news stories were much more carefully worded and the same leftist and "progressive" journalists/media who are now crying about the poor down-trodden syrian (or "syrian", depending who you believe) refugees (or "refugees", depending on who you believe), and anyone who questions them is a **** right-wing neo-nazi racist, made it so **** sure that there's not a single one of those "human interest" stories or photographs of the children in the battlefields to garner sympathy for the Ukranians, also I didn't see any stories how the ukranians' familes were broken, or how their lives are ruined due the warzones where the rebels and russians started to fight, at least not in the single one of the finnish news sites nor in the international european media I saw.

Neither I saw any interviews from the Ukranian refugee camps, or footage shown how utter shit are the conditions in the said camps.

Just so that you don't think I like conservative and/or right-wing media any better, I don't. They are equally manipulative and hypocritical as the leftie/"progressive" ones.

I just want even a single impartial and neutral news media who will just report the **** news without **** editorializing and trying to affect the public opinion toward the causes/people/politics they themselves hold or agree with, the finnish equivalent for BBC, Yle, used to be like that but now they've gone more and more toward the left from the impartial/centre.

Disclaimer: I used "crying about the poor down-trodden" just to show how differently the media depicts the Syrian and Ukranian conflicts, and Nepal disaster, I think all of those three things are pretty much equally horrible events, and the people who would need our aid, should get it.

What a load of utter, utter shite.

 

You've wandered way off the original conversation and appear to be trying to construct some strange argument against the media with me as some sort of leverage, based on me not announcing my calls for refugee acceptance at every disaster/warzone that there has ever been. It's so convoluted I don't even know where to start in reply.

Fwiw, my mother is an immigrant, so my stance on immigration has been pretty consistent for my whole life. If you want to trawl through my posting history then go right ahead, I'll leave you to it for now.

Not disrespect chap, but the sentance above explains everyone of your posts on here, an I do mean no disrepect. But to start, your a gonna be a little biased on Camerons latest immigration/refugee policy. Also what I have seen from your posts is alot of backing on letting all the refugees into our country but no real positives we may reap from it. So how is gonna help us letting another 10000+ into our small over populated island, because even though I am not opposed to immigration, I cannot see many postives to allowing more to settle here.

Is saving people from a warzone not a positive?

Do we just say "nah, soz. Don't see how this is going to help us so see ya later."?

 

What a strange argument.

because this is NOT an islamic country. we would not get away with filling any city in the middle east with our lot, we cant even build churches over there but mosques are flying up like its the new fashion over here. if anyone thinks its acceptable to have a muslim,sikh or even a fully white city then thats complete bullshit.

This isn't an Islamic country. What difference does that make?

India isn't a Christian country but there are areas of it that are 90% Christian. What's the difference?

 

There are plenty of "our lot" in the middle east. They don't fill cities but they're there. There's plenty of churches too. 

compare christianity in the muslim world to islam in the western world, dont need to say much more.

You'll have to say more because your sentence means nothing.

im saying more muslim immigrants will have mostly a negative affect on this country and we could do without it as we are way behind sorting the ones we already have out, yes helping people out during war is helpful and the good thing to do but we can only do so much and we cant keep letting folk in.

Those lovely royals that doth rule over your precious island have over $32billion of wealth, all earned through hard work and sweat. You should be happy that muslims who are not suitable for democracy wish to move to England. Status Quo for the win. Lizzy must be delighted. 

[Rugeley Villa]

because i believe it will be a strain on a country thats already suffering from muslim migration, yes muslim not eastern european or chinese and its going to create more tension and loss of housing for our own people that need it. ive made myself quite clear on my views of islam at the moment, how do we know who we are letting in? i think its pretty fair to say a number of these refuges will turn against the country that feeds them.

[Jarpie]

 

If I'd go back 1,5-2 years in your posting history, would I find posts where you'd call europeans to bring in ukranian refugees from the Crimea and Ukraine when Russians invaded Crimea?

 

 

I have no idea. I don't think I discussed the situation much on here. You certainly wouldn't see me opposing it.

But I don't see the relevance of that question. 

If I'm not opposed to Syrian refugees, why would I be opposed to Ukrainian ones?

I don't see what you're getting at. I have a feeling you don't either.

I've seen so many people spouting how europe needs to bring in all those poor middle-easterns in here and how they need to be helped, and how we need to show solidarity yada yada, just to show that they're supposedly "so progressive" and/or "so good people", but the same people were so **** quiet when there was that earthquake in nepal six months ago, and it didn't get nearly the same attention in the media.

I find those people to be utter hypocrites, if they'd really be such a good people they would've raised the same storm that european states need to bring in refugees from Nepal and pressured the european states to give much more humanitarian aid to the Nepal to bring them back up.

Same goes for the Ukraine in 2014 when the rebels started to fight in Ukraine and Russians invaded Crimea, sure it got media attention and it was followed by the news but I didn't see anyone saying how we need to bring in the Ukranian refugees from Crimea or Ukraine to the europe.

I was poking to see if you are one of those hypocrties, as so many others are, when the next big crisis starts somewhere in the world, I trust you to call out EU to bring the refugees in, as you are calling in to welcome the current migrants.

About the current refugee/migrant situation and the Ukranian crisis:

The news stories were much more carefully worded and the same leftist and "progressive" journalists/media who are now crying about the poor down-trodden syrian (or "syrian", depending who you believe) refugees (or "refugees", depending on who you believe), and anyone who questions them is a **** right-wing neo-nazi racist, made it so **** sure that there's not a single one of those "human interest" stories or photographs of the children in the battlefields to garner sympathy for the Ukranians, also I didn't see any stories how the ukranians' familes were broken, or how their lives are ruined due the warzones where the rebels and russians started to fight, at least not in the single one of the finnish news sites nor in the international european media I saw.

Neither I saw any interviews from the Ukranian refugee camps, or footage shown how utter shit are the conditions in the said camps.

Just so that you don't think I like conservative and/or right-wing media any better, I don't. They are equally manipulative and hypocritical as the leftie/"progressive" ones.

I just want even a single impartial and neutral news media who will just report the **** news without **** editorializing and trying to affect the public opinion toward the causes/people/politics they themselves hold or agree with, the finnish equivalent for BBC, Yle, used to be like that but now they've gone more and more toward the left from the impartial/centre.

Disclaimer: I used "crying about the poor down-trodden" just to show how differently the media depicts the Syrian and Ukranian conflicts, and Nepal disaster, I think all of those three things are pretty much equally horrible events, and the people who would need our aid, should get it.

What a load of utter, utter shite.

 

You've wandered way off the original conversation and appear to be trying to construct some strange argument against the media with me as some sort of leverage, based on me not announcing my calls for refugee acceptance at every disaster/warzone that there has ever been. It's so convoluted I don't even know where to start in reply.

Fwiw, my mother is an immigrant, so my stance on immigration has been pretty consistent for my whole life. If you want to trawl through my posting history then go right ahead, I'll leave you to it for now.

You as a leverage? That's rich, I mentioned you in one sentence and rest was about other people I've seen and about the media. If you'd welcome all refugees, that's good, if you're not one of those hypocrties then I'm glad, but it doesn't mean that other people wouldn't be hypocrites.

I find people hypocrties who couldn't care less about the plight of the, for example, Ukrainians or the Nepalese to start drives to collect aid packets for them, or pressure the governments to send much more aid to Nepal than what they did, but now that they see couple sensationalistic stories about refugees, they suddenly want to show how "good people" they are.

If they'd really care about the plight of the Syrian refugees, they would try to find the ways to help all those sick, children, women and the elderly who can't get to the europe from the refugee camps around the syria, instead of just welcoming and aiding all those people who were healthy or strong enough to travel and rich enough to pay for the human smugglers, which isn't cheap btw, or are those just worth of our aid and hospitality who can make it to the europe on their own, or is it just about getting people in who will potentially be value to us as the new cheap labor? Gee, that sounds like they actually don't care about helping those who would need it most, but just taking the people who can profit the european states.

Are you really going to claim that vast majority of the media from the both sides (left and right) doesn't try to push their own agendas and influence the public opinion with their sensationalistic articles and news items, or are you really going to claim that they have reported the Ukrainian crisis and the middle-east/refugee crisis both the same way? My wording on my previous post about the media and Ukraine wasn't probably worded well enough as I'm not a native english speaker, but I do certainly see big difference in reporting, at least in here, and I doubt british media is any better.

I actually (mostly) liked YLE's reporting on Ukrainian crisis as it was mostly not sensationalistic, and they reported what was going on without resolting in very annoying "human interest" stories to get views or push agendas.

Or is the agenda pushing alright from the media you like because you agree with them on politics and their agenda?

[Chindie]

There's something about the casual 'more Muslims'll **** the country' line here that really, really sits uneasy with me.

And I despise Islam and think an awful lot of people are words removed..

[HanoiVillan]

 

If I'd go back 1,5-2 years in your posting history, would I find posts where you'd call europeans to bring in ukranian refugees from the Crimea and Ukraine when Russians invaded Crimea?

 

 

I have no idea. I don't think I discussed the situation much on here. You certainly wouldn't see me opposing it.

But I don't see the relevance of that question. 

If I'm not opposed to Syrian refugees, why would I be opposed to Ukrainian ones?

I don't see what you're getting at. I have a feeling you don't either.

I've seen so many people spouting how europe needs to bring in all those poor middle-easterns in here and how they need to be helped, and how we need to show solidarity yada yada, just to show that they're supposedly "so progressive" and/or "so good people", but the same people were so **** quiet when there was that earthquake in nepal six months ago, and it didn't get nearly the same attention in the media.

I find those people to be utter hypocrites, if they'd really be such a good people they would've raised the same storm that european states need to bring in refugees from Nepal and pressured the european states to give much more humanitarian aid to the Nepal to bring them back up.

Same goes for the Ukraine in 2014 when the rebels started to fight in Ukraine and Russians invaded Crimea, sure it got media attention and it was followed by the news but I didn't see anyone saying how we need to bring in the Ukranian refugees from Crimea or Ukraine to the europe.

I was poking to see if you are one of those hypocrties, as so many others are, when the next big crisis starts somewhere in the world, I trust you to call out EU to bring the refugees in, as you are calling in to welcome the current migrants.

About the current refugee/migrant situation and the Ukranian crisis:

The news stories were much more carefully worded and the same leftist and "progressive" journalists/media who are now crying about the poor down-trodden syrian (or "syrian", depending who you believe) refugees (or "refugees", depending on who you believe), and anyone who questions them is a **** right-wing neo-nazi racist, made it so **** sure that there's not a single one of those "human interest" stories or photographs of the children in the battlefields to garner sympathy for the Ukranians, also I didn't see any stories how the ukranians' familes were broken, or how their lives are ruined due the warzones where the rebels and russians started to fight, at least not in the single one of the finnish news sites nor in the international european media I saw.

Neither I saw any interviews from the Ukranian refugee camps, or footage shown how utter shit are the conditions in the said camps.

Just so that you don't think I like conservative and/or right-wing media any better, I don't. They are equally manipulative and hypocritical as the leftie/"progressive" ones.

I just want even a single impartial and neutral news media who will just report the **** news without **** editorializing and trying to affect the public opinion toward the causes/people/politics they themselves hold or agree with, the finnish equivalent for BBC, Yle, used to be like that but now they've gone more and more toward the left from the impartial/centre.

Disclaimer: I used "crying about the poor down-trodden" just to show how differently the media depicts the Syrian and Ukranian conflicts, and Nepal disaster, I think all of those three things are pretty much equally horrible events, and the people who would need our aid, should get it.

Eh? I must be forgetting those streams of Ukrainian and Nepalese asylum seekers, I strangely can't seem to recall them at all . . . 

You mean these two million refugees, of which 800 000 have left Ukraine?

http://www.euronews.com/2015/04/22/ukraine-crisis-has-created-more-than-2-million-refugees-un-reports/

edit: also http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/may/13/ukraines-refugees-find-solace-in-poland-europes-most-homogenous-society

Your own links show that more than 650,000 of those refugees went straight over the border to Russia, and that the rest have settled in Poland and Belarus. There is no wave of Ukrainian refugees in western Europe - which is what your argument needs - and the line about Nepal is just risible nonsense. It's more than 8,500 km from Kathmandu to Berlin. Maybe they started walking six months ago though? 

[AshVilla]

From the horses mouth

http://news.yahoo.com/refugees-greece-macedonia-border-migrants-posing-syrian-160144148.html

Among some 2,000 people stranded on the border, hundreds are believed to be from Iraq, Bangladesh and Pakistan.

"There are many liars here, claiming to be from Syria," said Ahmet Mohamet, a 35-year-old Syrian. "They try to trick the police into letting them cross,"

"I think we would have an easier time crossing if this problem did not exist," Ahmet said.

 

 

[Chindie]

From the horses mouth

http://news.yahoo.com/refugees-greece-macedonia-border-migrants-posing-syrian-160144148.html

Among some 2,000 people stranded on the border, hundreds are believed to be from Iraq, Bangladesh and Pakistan.

"There are many liars here, claiming to be from Syria," said Ahmet Mohamet, a 35-year-old Syrian. "They try to trick the police into letting them cross,"

"I think we would have an easier time crossing if this problem did not exist," Ahmet said.

 

 

'Some of these people are bastards so **** the lot of them.'

A line of thinking that has a logical conclusion of launching all the nukes as some people of every people are words removed.

[Jarpie]

 

If I'd go back 1,5-2 years in your posting history, would I find posts where you'd call europeans to bring in ukranian refugees from the Crimea and Ukraine when Russians invaded Crimea?

 

 

I have no idea. I don't think I discussed the situation much on here. You certainly wouldn't see me opposing it.

But I don't see the relevance of that question. 

If I'm not opposed to Syrian refugees, why would I be opposed to Ukrainian ones?

I don't see what you're getting at. I have a feeling you don't either.

I've seen so many people spouting how europe needs to bring in all those poor middle-easterns in here and how they need to be helped, and how we need to show solidarity yada yada, just to show that they're supposedly "so progressive" and/or "so good people", but the same people were so **** quiet when there was that earthquake in nepal six months ago, and it didn't get nearly the same attention in the media.

I find those people to be utter hypocrites, if they'd really be such a good people they would've raised the same storm that european states need to bring in refugees from Nepal and pressured the european states to give much more humanitarian aid to the Nepal to bring them back up.

Same goes for the Ukraine in 2014 when the rebels started to fight in Ukraine and Russians invaded Crimea, sure it got media attention and it was followed by the news but I didn't see anyone saying how we need to bring in the Ukranian refugees from Crimea or Ukraine to the europe.

I was poking to see if you are one of those hypocrties, as so many others are, when the next big crisis starts somewhere in the world, I trust you to call out EU to bring the refugees in, as you are calling in to welcome the current migrants.

About the current refugee/migrant situation and the Ukranian crisis:

The news stories were much more carefully worded and the same leftist and "progressive" journalists/media who are now crying about the poor down-trodden syrian (or "syrian", depending who you believe) refugees (or "refugees", depending on who you believe), and anyone who questions them is a **** right-wing neo-nazi racist, made it so **** sure that there's not a single one of those "human interest" stories or photographs of the children in the battlefields to garner sympathy for the Ukranians, also I didn't see any stories how the ukranians' familes were broken, or how their lives are ruined due the warzones where the rebels and russians started to fight, at least not in the single one of the finnish news sites nor in the international european media I saw.

Neither I saw any interviews from the Ukranian refugee camps, or footage shown how utter shit are the conditions in the said camps.

Just so that you don't think I like conservative and/or right-wing media any better, I don't. They are equally manipulative and hypocritical as the leftie/"progressive" ones.

I just want even a single impartial and neutral news media who will just report the **** news without **** editorializing and trying to affect the public opinion toward the causes/people/politics they themselves hold or agree with, the finnish equivalent for BBC, Yle, used to be like that but now they've gone more and more toward the left from the impartial/centre.

Disclaimer: I used "crying about the poor down-trodden" just to show how differently the media depicts the Syrian and Ukranian conflicts, and Nepal disaster, I think all of those three things are pretty much equally horrible events, and the people who would need our aid, should get it.

Eh? I must be forgetting those streams of Ukrainian and Nepalese asylum seekers, I strangely can't seem to recall them at all . . . 

You mean these two million refugees, of which 800 000 have left Ukraine?

http://www.euronews.com/2015/04/22/ukraine-crisis-has-created-more-than-2-million-refugees-un-reports/

edit: also http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/may/13/ukraines-refugees-find-solace-in-poland-europes-most-homogenous-society

Your own links show that more than 650,000 of those refugees went straight over the border to Russia, and that the rest have settled in Poland and Belarus. There is no wave of Ukrainian refugees in western Europe - which is what your argument needs - and the line about Nepal is just risible nonsense. It's more than 8,500 km from Kathmandu to Berlin. Maybe they started walking six months ago though? 

So just the people who can travel to europe deserves our help, and our attention? Gotcha.

The point I was trying to make is that many of those people couldn't care rats ass about the Ukrainians or the Nepalese (who I took as an example because the earthquake was the latest big disaster I remember), but now that it's fashionable to care about these specific migrants they suddenly want to show how huge humanitarians they are.