Refugee crisis

[mjmooney]

Good conversation, but drifting a bit off the refugee topic, perhaps should be taken over to the religion thread, or better still the history thread.

[CarewsEyebrowDesigner]

There is a comment piece in the Guardian about the Hungary situation (arguing against the Guvmint, essentially) which is fair enough, but the comment section beneath is borderline Daily Mail...

It seems like politics in the UK is going to eat itself over this refugee issue.

[Chindie]

Good conversation, but drifting a bit off the refugee topic, perhaps should be taken over to the religion thread, or better still the history thread.

If only it was all history...

[MakemineVanilla]

I think Islam seems to work very much like Christianity, in that it seems to provide a set of laws which pacify the general population, divides the world into them and us, while underpinning the power of those at the top.

So while we have bishops crowning hereditary monarchs, Islam has the caliph who is considered a political and religious successor to the prophet.

Islam has jihad which is declared by those in authority, Christianity has the concept of 'just war' which arrived with Saint Augustine who brought Christianity to Britain.

And while the people are given the message about gentle Jesus, turning the other cheek, not resisting evil, paying their taxes and are told that those in authority were put there by God, the monarch can do as they like in between their wars of succession.

Sceptics and doubters generally see religion as the mystification of the people for the benefit of a ruling elite, which guarantees permanent violent struggle for privileges of power between those with claims to hereditary or those who claim they are God's choice or the prophet's real successor.

Knowing what is written does not really change that perception.

 

 

 

 

 

[Jarpie]

There is a comment piece in the Guardian about the Hungary situation (arguing against the Guvmint, essentially) which is fair enough, but the comment section beneath is borderline Daily Mail...

It seems like politics in the UK is going to eat itself over this refugee issue.

Welcome to the modern world, the extremes of the both (or all) sides of the issue will drown down any reasonable and rational discussion outside of the small forums, such as this, or private discussions, which in turn will feed just more of the same imbecilles spouting the retarded rhetoric (again from the all sides) against each other and prevent any civilized debate on the issue(s), and the media is happy to oblige because they can then turn it into the new sensationalistic clickbait articles, thus the cycle is born.

[KHV]

I think Islam seems to work very much like Christianity, in that it seems to provide a set of laws which pacify the general population, divides the world into them and us, while underpinning the power of those at the top.

So while we have bishops crowning hereditary monarchs, Islam has the caliph who is considered a political and religious successor to the prophet.

Islam has jihad which is declared by those in authority, Christianity has the concept of 'just war' which arrived with Saint Augustine who brought Christianity to Britain.

And while the people are given the message about gentle Jesus, turning the other cheek, not resisting evil, paying their taxes and are told that those in authority were put there by God, the monarch can do as they like in between their wars of succession.

Sceptics and doubters generally see religion as the mystification of the people for the benefit of a ruling elite, which guarantees permanent violent struggle for privileges of power between those with claims to hereditary or those who claim they are God's choice or the prophet's real successor.

Knowing what is written does not really change that perception.

 

 

 

 

 

Good conversation, but drifting a bit off the refugee topic, perhaps should be taken over to the religion thread, or better still the history thread.

It was bound to drift in this general direction given that the refugees are coming from an Islamic country. If the refugees were coming from a country which was mainly christian and the refugees were mainly white then there wouldn't be half the amount of fuss.

[MakemineVanilla]

.

[snowychap]

Absolutely!

[mjmooney]

Let's bring a bit of literary culture into this thread. I wonder what Shakespeare would have to say about migrants (economic or otherwise) and refugees from foreign wars? 

Well, if you've got the patience to deal with a bit of Tudor era English... 

"Sir Thomas More" is an Elizabethan play and a dramatic biography based on particular events in the life of the Catholic martyr Thomas More, who rose to become the Lord Chancellor of England during the reign of Henry VIII. The play is considered to be written by Anthony Munday and Henry Chettle and revised by several writers. It is particularly notable for a three page handwritten revision that is considered by many scholars to be by William Shakespeare.This addresses the intolerant mob which, on the “ill May Day” of 1517 demanded the expulsion of foreign refugees believed to be competing in the London labour market. It seems to me to be movingly topical:

 

Grant them removed, and grant that this your noise 
Hath chid down all the majesty of England; 
Imagine that you see the wretched strangers, 
Their babies at their backs and their poor luggage, 
Plodding tooth ports and costs for transportation, 
And that you sit as kings in your desires, 
Authority quite silent by your brawl, 
And you in ruff of your opinions clothed; 
What had you got? I'll tell you: you had taught 
How insolence and strong hand should prevail, 
How order should be quelled; and by this pattern 
Not one of you should live an aged man, 
For other ruffians, as their fancies wrought, 
With self same hand, self reasons, and self right, 
Would shark on you, and men like ravenous fishes 
Would feed on one another… 
…what do you to your souls 
In doing this? O, desperate as you are, 
Wash your foul minds with tears, and those same hands, 
That you like rebels lift against the peace, 
Lift up for peace, and your unreverent knees, 
Make them your feet to kneel to be forgiven! 
Tell me but this: what rebel captain, 
As mutinies are incident, by his name 
Can still the rout? who will obey a traitor? 
Or how can well that proclamation sound, 
When there is no addition but a rebel 
To qualify a rebel? 
You'll put down strangers, 
Kill them, cut their throats, possess their houses, 
And lead the majesty of law in line, 
To slip him like a hound. 
Say now the king 
(As he is clement, if th' offender mourn) 
Should so much come to short of your great trespass 
As but to banish you, whether would you go? 
What country, by the nature of your error, 
Should give you harbor? go you to France or Flanders, 
To any German province, to Spain or Portugal, 
Nay, any where that not adheres to England,
Why, you must needs be strangers: would you be pleased 
To find a nation of such barbarous temper, 
That, breaking out in hideous violence, 
Would not afford you an abode on earth, 
Whet their detested knives against your throats, 
Spurn you like dogs, and like as if that God 
Owed not nor made not you, nor that the claimants 
Were not all appropriate to your comforts, 
But chartered unto them, what would you think 
To be thus used? this is the strangers case; 
And this your mountanish inhumanity.

 

Rather good, that, I think. 

 

 

Edited September 17, 2015 by mjmooney

[Ikantcpell]

Anyone on here donate money to any of the organisations helping the poor refugees ?

[NurembergVillan]

Nah. I was going to but this thread changed my mind. They can all get lost.

[Marka Ragnos]

And this your mountanish inhumanity.

Hell, yeah. And note the dude's use of the ancient Greek figure of speech of zeugma.  

[MakemineVanilla]

Let's bring a bit of literary culture into this thread. I wonder what Shakespeare would have to say about migrants (economic or otherwise) and refugees from foreign wars? 

Well, if you've got the patience to deal with a bit of Tudor era English... 

"Sir Thomas More" is an Elizabethan play and a dramatic biography based on particular events in the life of the Catholic martyr Thomas More, who rose to become the Lord Chancellor of England during the reign of Henry VIII. The play is considered to be written by Anthony Munday and Henry Chettle and revised by several writers. It is particularly notable for a three page handwritten revision that is considered by many scholars to be by William Shakespeare.This addresses the intolerant mob which, on the “ill May Day” of 1517 demanded the expulsion of foreign refugees believed to be competing in the London labour market. It seems to me to be movingly topical:

 

Grant them removed, and grant that this your noise 
Hath chid down all the majesty of England; 
Imagine that you see the wretched strangers, 
Their babies at their backs and their poor luggage, 
Plodding tooth ports and costs for transportation, 
And that you sit as kings in your desires, 
Authority quite silent by your brawl, 
And you in ruff of your opinions clothed; 
What had you got? I'll tell you: you had taught 
How insolence and strong hand should prevail, 
How order should be quelled; and by this pattern 
Not one of you should live an aged man, 
For other ruffians, as their fancies wrought, 
With self same hand, self reasons, and self right, 
Would shark on you, and men like ravenous fishes 
Would feed on one another… 
…what do you to your souls 
In doing this? O, desperate as you are, 
Wash your foul minds with tears, and those same hands, 
That you like rebels lift against the peace, 
Lift up for peace, and your unreverent knees, 
Make them your feet to kneel to be forgiven! 
Tell me but this: what rebel captain, 
As mutinies are incident, by his name 
Can still the rout? who will obey a traitor? 
Or how can well that proclamation sound, 
When there is no addition but a rebel 
To qualify a rebel? 
You'll put down strangers, 
Kill them, cut their throats, possess their houses, 
And lead the majesty of law in line, 
To slip him like a hound. 
Say now the king 
(As he is clement, if th' offender mourn) 
Should so much come to short of your great trespass 
As but to banish you, whether would you go? 
What country, by the nature of your error, 
Should give you harbor? go you to France or Flanders, 
To any German province, to Spain or Portugal, 
Nay, any where that not adheres to England,
Why, you must needs be strangers: would you be pleased 
To find a nation of such barbarous temper, 
That, breaking out in hideous violence, 
Would not afford you an abode on earth, 
Whet their detested knives against your throats, 
Spurn you like dogs, and like as if that God 
Owed not nor made not you, nor that the claimants 
Were not all appropriate to your comforts, 
But chartered unto them, what would you think 
To be thus used? this is the strangers case; 
And this your mountanish inhumanity.

 

Rather good, that, I think. 

 

Shakespeare always comes across as an Elizabethan spin doctor (the toadying in Henry VIII is sickening) and despite its power and beauty, such a plea does seem ironic when put in the mouth of Sir Thomas More, who famously welcomed Lutherans by burning them at the stake.  

But definitely consistent with those in power offering sermons to calm the proles but doing what they like in the name of God for their own political advantage.

[Jarpie]

There's been newsitems in YLE's (Equivalent of BBC) site that Iraqis are telling other iraqis in facebook not to come to finland because "life is ordinary" in here, and basically that Finland isn't "the promised land", I get that desperate people might try desperate things, but did they really believe the lies they've been fed about that europe is basically "the promised land", and that they'll get everything instantly they get in here? If they think Finland isn't anything special now, they should wait till the winter when especially up in the north the temperature goes to about -15c...-25c.

There also was newsitems that about half of the people who's come to finland in the past 3-4 weeks have loaned the money for the trip from organized crime loansharks, and obviously, when they can't pay back they'll use unsavoury ways to get what they own...plus interests naturally. It'll just create more crime, both in middle-east and in europe as the organized crime from middle-east and east europe will spread to the europe (and to Finland too), and they'll create more crime in here, as the migrants will then resolt getting the money to pay back their debt with illegal activities if they can't get work.

Just one more reason why they should've put the stop for the whole migration when it started, and found another way to solve the mess instead of letting everyone in and even encouraging desperate people to come to the europe with high-minded promises.

It really looks like that only people who have (and will) really benefitted from all of this is the organized crime, people smugglers and ISIS who takes their cut from the smugglers.

[Eames]

There's been newsitems in YLE's (Equivalent of BBC) site that Iraqis are telling other iraqis in facebook not to come to finland because "life is ordinary" in here, and basically that Finland isn't "the promised land", I get that desperate people might try desperate things, but did they really believe the lies they've been fed about that europe is basically "the promised land", and that they'll get everything instantly they get in here? If they think Finland isn't anything special now, they should wait till the winter when especially up in the north the temperature goes to about -15c...-25c.

There also was newsitems that about half of the people who's come to finland in the past 3-4 weeks have loaned the money for the trip from organized crime loansharks, and obviously, when they can't pay back they'll use unsavoury ways to get what they own...plus interests naturally. It'll just create more crime, both in middle-east and in europe as the organized crime from middle-east and east europe will spread to the europe (and to Finland too), and they'll create more crime in here, as the migrants will then resolt getting the money to pay back their debt with illegal activities if they can't get work.

Just one more reason why they should've put the stop for the whole migration when it started, and found another way to solve the mess instead of letting everyone in and even encouraging desperate people to come to the europe with high-minded promises.

It really looks like that only people who have (and will) really benefitted from all of this is the organized crime, people smugglers and ISIS who takes their cut from the smugglers.

 

How do you suggest that "they" (whoever "they" are) should have stopped migration when it started? Build a wall around Syria? Tell all the people fleeing the **** the West created that they should stay in Syria/Iraq and get murdered/raped etc by ISIS and just deal with it because hey - Finland ain't the promised land? 

 

I'd also be fascinated to see the statistics that prove that refugees as opposed to any other group of migrants, economic or otherwise, are responsible for an increase in crime levels. 

[Jarpie]

There's been newsitems in YLE's (Equivalent of BBC) site that Iraqis are telling other iraqis in facebook not to come to finland because "life is ordinary" in here, and basically that Finland isn't "the promised land", I get that desperate people might try desperate things, but did they really believe the lies they've been fed about that europe is basically "the promised land", and that they'll get everything instantly they get in here? If they think Finland isn't anything special now, they should wait till the winter when especially up in the north the temperature goes to about -15c...-25c.

There also was newsitems that about half of the people who's come to finland in the past 3-4 weeks have loaned the money for the trip from organized crime loansharks, and obviously, when they can't pay back they'll use unsavoury ways to get what they own...plus interests naturally. It'll just create more crime, both in middle-east and in europe as the organized crime from middle-east and east europe will spread to the europe (and to Finland too), and they'll create more crime in here, as the migrants will then resolt getting the money to pay back their debt with illegal activities if they can't get work.

Just one more reason why they should've put the stop for the whole migration when it started, and found another way to solve the mess instead of letting everyone in and even encouraging desperate people to come to the europe with high-minded promises.

It really looks like that only people who have (and will) really benefitted from all of this is the organized crime, people smugglers and ISIS who takes their cut from the smugglers.

 

How do you suggest that "they" (whoever "they" are) should have stopped migration when it started? Build a wall around Syria? Tell all the people fleeing the **** the West created that they should stay in Syria/Iraq and get murdered/raped etc by ISIS and just deal with it because hey - Finland ain't the promised land? 

They as in people who makes the big decisions in EU and/or in the european nations, maybe close the borders and process people in there to decide who's actually refugee and who's not? Someone told me (I haven't checked it yet how true it is) that EU could've potentially solved this in 2009 when the dublin agreement was made - according to the person who told me this, there was another proposition for letting the people apply for refugee status in the embassies, for example in finland/germany/UK/etc embassies in Turkey could process the applications in there and then let them fly to their country, but for some reason this was rejected.

Don't put words into my mouth keyboard, I just said that they should've figured out some other way to solve the mass migration and refugeeing than just to open borders and let them wander freely, when the first signs of people trying desperately to get into europe by boats started to show some months ago, they should've started to plan something as it should've been clear to everyone with a functioning braincells that when the word spreads that they can get into the europe (relatively) freely, more and more people will start to come, which will then create multitude of problems.

Is something wrong with the way I write, or is everyone set into "Us vs Them"-mentality so much that if I don't say that everyone should be let into europe (or finland) freely and welcomed with open arms without any hesitation, or questioning that has this been thought through, I'm then obviously one of those bastards who wants to leave people to be killed and tortured?

 

I'd also be fascinated to see the statistics that prove that refugees as opposed to any other group of migrants, economic or otherwise, are responsible for an increase in crime levels. 

Either you're very naive, or you misunderstood what I wrote on purpose.

Do you know how how utterly **** ruthless organized crime is? I didn't mean that the migrants/refugees will start to randomly commit crimes, but that those migrants who have loaned the money from the organized crime and can't pay back will be forced to do crimes for them to pay back the "loan", and the huge interests they'll charge.

You think that they'll just let the migrants pay the loan back? Hell no, the way loansharks for organized crime works is that the loan isn't even meant to be paid back, as they can then exploit the desperate people as long as they can use them, and not to talk about their family members, such as their wives, daughters and sisters for prostitution or sell them as slaves, for example.

Finland has gotten some thousands of people in the past couple weeks, and if the finnish organized crime investigators are right that 40-50% of them have loand money from the organized crime, then the criminal organizations have gotten hundreds if not thousands of exploitable people to work for their organizations in here. You think those people can ever pay their loans back, which are in the several thousands of euros, plus the very high interests they charge on purpose so that the amount of the loan will multiply.

 

Why is it so hard for people who are so gung-ho about taking migrants to think about the effects it'll have, not only the logistical nightmare to find places to sleep for the arrivals, but to feed thounsands of people when they arrive to the reception centers, but also to the migrants as well? Something like this is a **** goldmine to the organized crime, who will then exploit them, but also that they've potentially sold everything they've owned or taken huge loans when people in middle-east and also in europe have told them that they're gonna get everything they've dreamed about, and when they arrive they find out the rugged reality; they're gonna be put into the quickly constructed improvised reception centre where they're getting bland meal and that europe is very expensive, as the iraqis had found out about the finland when they arrived.

Many of the iraqis who have arrived to finland wants to go back because this isn't what they were promised, after wasting thousands of dollars to come here.

[snowychap]

 

Is something wrong with the way I write, or is everyone set into "Us vs Them"-mentality so much...

...

Why is it so hard for people who are so gung-ho about taking migrants...

It would appear that the 'Us vs Them' mentality is very easy to slip in to.

[Jarpie]

 

Is something wrong with the way I write, or is everyone set into "Us vs Them"-mentality so much...

...

Why is it so hard for people who are so gung-ho about taking migrants...

It would appear that the 'Us vs Them' mentality is very easy to slip in to.

Good point, could've chosen my words better, but I meant those people who are the most passionate about letting all the migrants in without a hesitation or second thoughts, and yes, there are those people too. The retards who are "HURR DURR ALL MIGRANTS ARE TERRARISTS!", or who harass the volunteers who wants to help the people arriving aren't helping the situation either.

This is complicated issue and it isn't black and white, and the reality is that many of them will end up being exploited, for example, by the organized crime.

Edited September 21, 2015 by Jarpie

[snowychap]

 

This is complicated issue and it isn't black and white...

I agree and I think Eames does, too - which was why he probably posted what he did questioning what may have been seen as a much too simplistic 'solution' when you posted they should've put the stop for the whole migration when it started.

 

[Jarpie]

 

This is complicated issue and it isn't black and white...

I agree and I think Eames does, too - which was why he probably posted what he did questioning what may have been seen as a much too simplistic 'solution' when you posted they should've put the stop for the whole migration when it started.

 

I did say that they should've figured out some other way to solve it, although, tbf, I should've said that by they I meant the decision makers.

One possibility what they could've done is to form military force/unit combined with the humanitarian aid from the european nations and taken it to where the migrants are and taken care of them there, process the applications for the assylum there and then prioritize those who needs it the most. That isn't without its own problems but I think that, or something similar would have been better solution than "Let's let everyone who wants in and then figure out what we're gonna do with them".

As I think that most of the politicians are imbecilles, crooks or at best (or worst) case, both, I don't really have any confidence in european politicians to plan for anything or solve anything before they've been caught with their pants down in the ankles, and given my experience with the finnish politicians, they're too afraid to do anything pro-actively as they think it's better to not to do anything, than get blamed for it if something goes wrong.