While I have been immersed in our
rather depressing electoral process here in the States I have not
totally forgotten events taking place on the other side of the pond.
I heard about the new agreement between the EU and Turkey to send
migrants, who are currently in Greece, back to Turkey. For some
reason that struck me as a plan that might have a few problems, so I
decided to see what I could dig up on YouTube about the situation. Here are a few clips for your viewing.
So, for every migrant sent back from Greece to Turkey they are going to allow one refugee in Turkey to enter the EU. Hmm...well, I can seen where that might help Greece in the short term, assuming the flows of migrants/refugees stop, but I'm not sure how it will help Europe in the long term.
Or how it will help these people,
Somehow this makes our problems look rather small.
55 comments:
Explosions at the Airport in Brussels about 30 minutes ago. Not many details out yet but I would guess suicide bomber/s or a bomb in a suitcase left at the scene. I would also guess jihadists. One sourse claims the explosion was at the check in counter for American Airlines.
Some details out. They say at least 13 dead (some say 17) at the airport and at least 40 wounded. Also a follow up attack at a Metro station in Brussels has claimed at least 10 lives. There's a picture and it suggests a serious blast:
https://twitter.com/alxdm/status/712214397482094592/photo/1
Brussels is now in a lockdown state.
Seems almost certain it's connected to the same group that attacked Paris. Maybe they wanted to strike back in vengeance because they were hunted by police, maybe they felt cornered by those raids, maybe they had it planned even before. But it seems unlikely it would be any other group. Shouting in Arabic by the attackeers at the airport has been mentioned, I'm not sure if that's confirmed.
It's getting worse for every update. 13:30 the newest estimate was: at least 14 dead and 81 wounded at the airport. At least 20 dead and 55 wounded at the subway station. At least one terrorist, possibly more, believed to be alive, might be trying to hide or might try to strike again.
Much of Brussels is locked down. All public transportation, the Parliament, every road tunnel over 300 meters long, one nuclear plant in the vincinity.
Seems almost certain it's connected to the same group that attacked Paris.
From what I have read that group had planned more attacks. Since the capture of the man in Belgium who was connected to that attack my guess would be that the rest of those involved, who were still at large, have decided to launch those attacks where they can before they are caught. It was a race against time to catch them before they were able to attack again.
^ I believe exactly the same thing Lynnette.
As of now the US State Dept. is apparently advising caution in traveling to Europe as they are saying the risk of more attacks in the "near term" is high.
As an update to my earlier post regarding the FBI vs Apple, the FBI has said that a third party has recently come forward with a possible method to unlock the iPhone. If it works Apple's help will not be necessary.
In light of the terror attacks in Belgium, this New Yorker article may be an timely re-read.
One of the terrorists was a "swede", or an arab who immigrated to Sweden as an economic migrant in 2010 and now say thank you by killing kafirs.
Lynnette:
"As of now the US State Dept. is apparently advising caution in traveling to Europe as they are saying the risk of more attacks in the "near term" is high."
For sure there are risks. This is just getting started a little bit. And it will eventually escalate to a civil war like situation. Probably too late to stop that. But for certain if naive morons with bleeding hearts get to continue the massive import of enemies it's not a possibility, not even a probability but a certainty.
Too bad. We had a few good decades here since we stopped killing eachother. Now we've thrown that away. A pity. We'll probably win in the end though but not before much bloodshed on both sides ending in massive ethno-religous cleansings.
I don't presume to know what the answer is to Europe's problem, Marcus, but I can't imagine that all of those people who have migrated to Europe have done so with the intent to destroy it.
We had a few good decades here since we stopped killing eachother.
So maybe finding a way to neutralize the bad guys without killing everyone in sight might be something worth attempting?
Don't need to be all Lynnette. The question is who they'll side with when the conflict worsens. Their own is my firm belief.
We might have tough times ahead real soon:
"PARIS (AP) — Security officials have told The Associated Press that the Islamic State group has trained at least 400 attackers and sent them into Europe for terror attacks."
http://bigstory.ap.org/article/4fe6b297e6e94b6ebe650367946cff23/trains-400-fighters-attack-europe-wave-bloodshed
Came in on the refugee train undocumented. No one knows who or where they are. Merkel and her ilk are directly to blame for future attacks. "Wir shaffen es!" Well, nein frau dumbkopf das tun wir nicht!
A more detailed article:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/isis-has-at-least-440-fighters-trained-to-attack-europe-in-deadly-waves-a6948696.html
I can teell you one thing. I will not be buying any tickets for this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UEFA_Euro_2016
"Since the capture of the man in Belgium who was connected to that
attack my guess would be that the rest of those involved, who were
still at large, have decided to launch those attacks where they can
before they are caught."
Reasonable hypothesis. Da‘esh has claimed the credit for this, but they could be grasping. I'm thinking these decisions are being made locally, in Europe.
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
"…the FBI has said that a third party has recently come forward with a
possible method to unlock the iPhone. If it works Apple's help will not
be necessary."
I'm surprised they said that out loud. I've been of the opinion that the Justice Department was bringing this as a test case. I never did believe that they couldn't hire sufficient talent to unlock that phone.
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
"And it will eventually escalate to a civil war like situation."
Well, I guess we know where you're going with it. So, I'm not gonna ask if you're arming up already. Surely you'd have better sense than to admit that on the internet.
Ross Douthat (who is, by the way, a very conservative Republican) tells us that Trump is the harbinger of the Republican schism. It is already here; it is upon them already. Trump is the proof.
Or, so he says.
An interesting read Lee. I wonder about this:
"If Trump isn’t the nominee, if he enters the convention with a plurality of delegates and leaves without the nomination, then he becomes the spoiler — either as a third-party candidate or (more likely, I think) as a kind of permanent roadshow, attacking the Cruz-Kasich ticket at every opportunity and urging his supporters to never vote Republican again."
First, hasn't he already promised not to run as a third party candidate? I think I saw that. If so in my opinion that should make option #1 impossible. Well not impossible but very unlikely.
Second, would he really make outright war on the republican party as iss suggested?
My best guess would be for him to be very vocal about them making a mistake, then rubbing that in if they do lose, but not urging anyone away from voting republican.
The reason I think this is because if he went with that and they lost he could claim it was indeed because they ursurped his "righful" nomination. Whereas if he denounced the party all together the loss could be blamed on him instead.
But maybe he's not that rational?
"First, hasn't he already promised not to run as a third party candidate?"
Yeah, but that don't mean anything, not with Trump.
"But maybe he's not that rational?"
I think he's quite rational enough; it's the clowns that're supporting him that worry me. He'll not pull it off; he's not gonna win the Presidency; he'll fade away, but they'll still be out there.
Don't need to be all Lynnette. The question is who they'll side with when the conflict worsens. Their own is my firm belief.
We have always said all along that to defeat Daesh, and its ilk, it will take people in the Islamic community standing up and saying enough is enough. We have been seeing massive numbers of people migrating from the Middle East. Granted many are displaced because of the war in Syria between Assad's government and the rebels. But what they are choosing to do is flee rather than join Daesh. So when you say they will side with their own perhaps the definition of that term is not what you believe. Yes 400, assuming that is an accurate number, is quite a lot. It is necessary to be cautious and security aware. But I don't believe that many of the people who are fleeing the conflicts in the Middle East really wish to bring it all with them. I can almost guarantee that there are those within those communities who would help you if given the right incentives. After all, where will they flee to if Europe does actually fall into a civil war like you fear? Russia?
I'm thinking these decisions are being made locally, in Europe.
Yes.
I'm surprised they said that out loud. I've been of the opinion that the Justice Department was bringing this as a test case.
I believe there is more than one case out there. This is just the more high profile one.
I never did believe that they couldn't hire sufficient talent to unlock that phone.
That struck me as odd too. Unless they just didn't want to put it out there what their capabilities are. Now perhaps for some reason they are thinking the opposite.
The State Department's warning about a high risk level for attacks all over in Europe struck me as odd too. At least the wording did. It seemed more certain than usual. But then I could just be reading more into it than is there.
I think he's quite rational enough; it's the clowns that're supporting him that worry me.
We've always had extremists here too. It's more the rational people who are supporting him that concern me. That's a sign of some very unhappy people. Or some people who are still ready to fall for a snake oil salesman.
"This is just the more high profile one."
That's why I thought they'd picked this particular one to lean into.
Lynnette: "Yes 400, assuming that is an accurate number, is quite a lot. It is necessary to be cautious and security aware. But I don't believe that many of the people who are fleeing the conflicts in the Middle East really wish to bring it all with them. I can almost guarantee that there are those within those communities who would help you if given the right incentives."
It's not only the maybe 400, maybe less, maybe more. Obviously they must have enablers also. Abdelslam seems to have been scurrrying around and hiding in several places and he must have had assistance. Then there are the non-participating supporters, seen in such instances as a teacher in Belgium questioning how he's supposed to teach his class when some students celebrate the attacks:
http://www.rtlnieuws.nl/nieuws/binnenland/drie-agenten-aan-de-deur-na-tweet-over-aanslagen-brussel
But then there's the much larger group who "flee" to Europe mainly for economic reasons but want to bring their culture with them and see demands that they adhere to some of our most basic beliefs as an attack on them.
Sure there are those who integrate and even assimilate, but a large portion blends with European values about as well as oil with water. And if the stakes are raised, the crisis worsens, more attacks come I don't expect them to side with us. I see no signs of that. We ARE "the infidel" to them and will remain so.
Then, on the flip side, you have to realise that many europeans are extremely fed up and pissed off already. That genie won't be put back into a bottle any time soon and I don't expect our side to behave altogether civilised going forward. Feeling cornered people lash out. At least europeans do, as history teaches us.
Possibly, possibly, if the new harder stance against further immigration stands and can be made real and not just words then we have a shot at it not coming to a war like scenario. Serious strife is unavoidable, but perhaps we can dodge war still. Unfortunately I'm not very optimistic at this point.
Also: "But I don't believe that many of the people who are fleeing the conflicts in the Middle East really wish to bring it all with them. I can almost guarantee that there are those within those communities who would help you if given the right incentives"
Then why don't you take in a million or two? We've done it already, now it's your turn.
"Then why don't you take in a million or two? We've done it already,
now it's your turn."
I didn't see any sign of of ya'll steppin’ up for a turn while we were takin’ in some 11 million illegal immigrants. Ya'll ain't nowhere near caught up yet; your turn ain't nowhere near over.
Don't fret Lee, Trump's gonna build a wall to stop the tide and then send a whole lot of 'em back again once he becomes your President. In November, is it?
That'd be November you're thinkin’ of, yeah. But, ain't got squat to do with ya'll not bein’ nowhere near caught up yet.
Yall should watch this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cWSMURYM7bA
Lots of stuff from my own home town.
Why Belgium?
I'm halfway through the video, Marcus, I'll have to finish it tomorrow. Yes, I can see why you are worried and angry.
Basically, Obama's got it 60/40 in favor of him getting to make the Supreme Court ‘pick’ as opposed to just making the nomination. That's higher than his own approval rating, which shows either that some folks approve of him more when compared close up to Mitch McConnell and the Senate Republicans, or they just think the process should not get bogged down ‘cause of McConnell's hopin’ to game the system and get another Republican appointment added on to the next presidential term.
An interesting srticle about the fight against Daesh:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle_east/in-syria-and-iraq-the-islamic-state-is-in-retreat-on-multiple-fronts/2016/03/24/a0e33774-f101-11e5-a2a3-d4e9697917d1_story.html
Seems to be going rather well. Unusually Russsia actually gets some credit for their part played.
I just finished watching that video, Marcus. I have a couple of comments. First, the young man who was born in Sweden but espouses support for Sharia Law, I wonder why he wasn't questioned about his staying in Sweden when obviously he could travel to a region of the world where that law is practiced. Second, the young man who is dealing drugs to support himself, I would hope that if he were caught he would be deported, as should anyone committing a crime. But I think I have mentioned this last one before.
This Washington Post article was in my paper the other day:
Islamic extremists create base in Brussels
... they just think the process should not get bogged down ‘cause of McConnell's hopin’ to game the system and get another Republican appointment added on to the next presidential term.
I have to wonder if even some Republicans aren't getting tired of that kind of thing. Besides, from what I've read about Obama's choice he wouldn't be that hard for anyone to choose to confirm.
Michael Hirsch essay on why our Muslims are better than their Muslims (and why folks like Trump and Cruz gotta be stopped before they screw things up).
Just a quick comment as I have some errands to run (I'll have to read the article later).
In all the videos and articles I've read about Europe and its Muslim population I've gotten the impression that it has been very hard for people moving there to feel as if they fit in or are accepted as a true citizen of the country to which they have come. When someone feels alienated from the society they live in there is the risk that they will act out in ways that are not desired. We see it here in the States, not so much with terrorism activities, but with shooters in schools, usually kids who are alienated by bullies, or the feeling that they are different. Granted, those in the Muslim community who truly desire some kind of Sharia Law type of governance will never fit in, because that is not desired by the general population. They will either need to change their thinking or leave. If the general population becomes such that something like Sharia Law is desired by most then you will see the values that have made Europe an open, liberal society erode. At that point it will no longer be the place that many of these migrants have chosen to move to. They will in the end have shot themselves, along with the native population, in the collective foot.
There is an incredible amount of hysteria around at the moment, a lot of whipped up by the media. The right wing is anxious to jump on the bandwagon too. There isn't the slightest chance of Sharia law being imposed anywhere in Europe. There isn't an invasion of Muslim welfare migrants, contrary to what that skin crawling right wing sleazeball in Marcus's video claims. The often heard claim, which he repeats, that Syrian refugees are overwhelmingly "military age males" is a lie.
The bombers in Brussels and shooters in Paris, just like London's 7/7 attackers are homegrown terrorists. They have no particular religious motives, though that might be a useful excuse. In fact they have more in common with another "religious" group -- abortion doctor killers in the USA. When you delve into the actual cases, you find that many have histories of petty or more serious crime, drug addiction, or mental illness.
I'm not making excuses for them. I don't have a death wish -- and I've been through that airport and metro dozens of times, and have a sibling who lives there and passes through the airport regularly with young children, most recently the day before the Zaventem bombs. But the frenzy being whipped up by the right about immigration on the back of this stuff is not only disingenuous but counterproductive.
I'm glad to hear that your relatives are all fine, Petes. It's kind of hard to fathom what that must be like to have some place you are so familiar with be center stage as a terror crime scene.
I am not in Europe so don't know from first hand experience what the situation is like. The videos I have seen, some sensationalist and others more mainstream news, seem to show a picture of a large migration of people into Europe. That in itself will cause problems simply because of the strain on resources. Throw into the mix this situation with Daesh and terrorism and it is easy to see the fear and anxiety that will arise. I don't know if the makeup of the migrants is more young males, but even so that doesn't necessarily mean they are up to no good. They may be simply taking this risky journey in order to be able to send for their families later using safer methods of travel.
As for Sharia law, as long as there are laws in place that uphold the rights of all individuals, and they are enforced, then this should not be an issue.
What I have read is that the biggest fear seems to be that people who have traveled from Europe to Syria to fight with Daesh will return home and be a threat to Europe's security. And, in fact, it does seem to be that at least one of the men involved in the Brussels bombing had done just that.
"There isn't the slightest chance of Sharia law being imposed anywhere
in Europe."
Glenn Hannibaugh regularly tells us that there are scores of ‘Sharia Courts’ already constituted in Great Britain.
"They have no particular religious motives, though that might be a
useful excuse."
Terrorizing ‘the infidels’ may actually qualify as a religious motive, whether you like that or not. Heathens, papists, whomever…terrorizing the other guys has a long history in religion as religion. Not everybody sees religion the same way you do. It's not an exercise in clinical theology for wide swaths of people; it's a categorization, a sorting mechanism, instead.
That Michael Hirsch essay was very good, Lee.
I had another one that was even further into classical ‘liberal’ territory. It was all atwitter about Trump and Cruz leading a fascist movement (which they are; maybe not leading, but definitely feeding the fire), but I thought it was maybe a little bit hysterical ‘bout where things stood. Never gonna get rid of everybody who paints with too broad a brush; they'll always be out there, but they're, well, they're busy getting their favored candidates undercut by the Republican ‘Establishment’, who've finally figured out they let these things go too far. It's gonna get ugly inside the Republican Party here soon, and the wingnuts will finally lose the backing and support of the royalists on account of the wingnuts have come to actually believe the bullshit the royalists were peddling as political philosophy (and that wasn't really supposed to happen).
The city of Cleveland, where this year's Republican Convention is to be held, is soliciting bids for more and newer riot-control gear for its police forces.
Okay, here's a worrier for everybody. Turns out that fracking causes the Earth to leak methane, significant quantities of methane. This is bad.
Pete: "There isn't the slightest chance of Sharia law being imposed anywhere in Europe."
Not as the law of the land (for a few decades ahead at least), but it is in fact commonplace in muslim communities both in the UK and elsewhere. Google for the danish documentary that came out just a few weeks ago where they did visits to mosques in Denmark. The same Imams who pledge allegiance to Danish law officially were ALL (without ANY exception) advicing/ruling according to Sharia within their own communities, labeling all non muslim danes as "infidels".
Pete: "There isn't an invasion of Muslim welfare migrants, contrary to what that skin crawling right wing sleazeball in Marcus's video claims."
Oh really? Why is it then that my own city Malmö is dependent on massive tax-redistruutions from other municipitalities in Sweden? We have the best geographical location, we have a vibrant jobs market, we have some of the most popular universities, yet we finance 20% of our budget by a fat wellfare check from other locales. Why is that? COULD it be because of the massive wellfare costs of all those non working immigrants you think? Nah, you're too GOOD and PROGRESSIVE to harbour such ideas, aren't you Pete? Therefore it must be untrue.
Pete: "The often heard claim, which he repeats, that Syrian refugees are overwhelmingly "military age males" is a lie."
First of all you do that sickening thing all liberals do where you automatically start talking about "syrian refugees" because you know people feel for actual refugees from that war torn nation.
FACT: only 35% of the "refugees" last year were from Syria. And in those 35% are also all those who claim to be syrians for asylum purposes but who are not.
FACT: About 70% of migrants into Europe last year were indeed men. It's possible that "military aged men" didn't form an actual majority but they most likely did, depending on how you draw the lines for "military aged".
Pete: "The bombers in Brussels and shooters in Paris, just like London's 7/7 attackers are homegrown terrorists."
Still, at least a few of 'em went to Syria for Jihadi training and came back on the refugee train with new identities.
And for that matter: why should it be in the least bit reassuring that most terrorists have been "home grown"? Why do you seem to think that those who enter now, in way larger numbers, with way scarcer opportuities will "integrate" any better than those jihadists who caused the attacks we've seen recently?
Don't you realise we're now sowing the seeds for future mayhem and maybe wars?
Lynnette: "In all the videos and articles I've read about Europe and its Muslim population I've gotten the impression that it has been very hard for people moving there to feel as if they fit in or are accepted as a true citizen of the country to which they have come. When someone feels alienated from the society they live in there is the risk that they will act out in ways that are not desired."
For sure that's true. I'm one of the honest ones who admit I don't much like muslim ways in general (in general mind you - on an individual basis I could very well be friends with one). And I actively segregate myself as to where I live. About halt of my home town is unthinkable to me to move to because it's now packed with immigrants. Had I kids I would move heaven and earth for them not to have to go to a school with more than say 10% foreigners.
But the thing is almost ALL people actually behave like this. Even goody-goody-goody doo-gooders like PeteS would swiftly move his kids from a school if that school got a 50% ration of "migrant children". Then he would propagate the extreme benefits of INTEGRATION, but not for his own kids, only for other people's kids.
BTW: here's a link to the danish documentary:
http://play.tv2.dk/programmer/dokumentar/serier/moskeerne-bag-sloeret/integration-eller-ej-del-3-111780/http://play.tv2.dk/programmer/dokumentar/serier/moskeerne-bag-sloeret/integration-eller-ej-del-3-111780/
The advice from the Imams include:
"Don't tell the infidel (danes) what you own, because then you'll risk getting less in wellfare."
"You may beat your children when they are ten if they do not pray to Allah, but do not break any bones or stad with knives"
"We're at a time when Europe opens it's borders so now we have muslim communities in Europe"
"When I came here 23 years ago there were only 50.000 muslims, and now we are 300.000 muslims. Soon we can have oour own laws"
Turns out that fracking causes the Earth to leak methane, significant quantities of methane. This is bad.
Bad? Geez, if they're right we're totally screwed.
On the other hand, the author may be an evangelical renewable enthusiast who's nudging his data to promote renewables. If this is all true, we'll be hearing ‘bout it again. I'm gonna keep an eye on the subject.
"When I came here 23 years ago there were only 50.000 muslims, and now we are 300.000 muslims. Soon we can have oour own laws"
They had their own laws in their home countries. What was the point of moving then if they don't like the laws in the countries to which they have moved? That makes no sense.
"Don't tell the infidel (danes) what you own, because then you'll risk getting less in wellfare."
Now that just sounds like any welfare cheat out there.
If this is all true, we'll be hearing ‘bout it again. I'm gonna keep an eye on the subject.
It's something that could become an election issue if Hillary Clinton is so deeply involved in promoting fracking. Even if that was before this data came out. There will be hard questions on what her position will be in the future.
That link to the documentary didn't work, Marcus. It just said "404 not found".
Some quick drive-by random musings ...
Firstly, Happy Easter all. (That sentiment was enough to get someone killed not too far from here the other day). And a belated Happy Paddy's Day -- hope you painted the town green.
[Lynnette]: "I'm glad to hear that your relatives are all fine, Petes. It's kind of hard to fathom what that must be like to have some place you are so familiar with be center stage as a terror crime scene."
Yah, there are lots of nearer miss stories. Inevitable with such a centre of European affairs. I was out to dinner tonight with someone whose (Irish) sister relocated to Brussels from Ottawa just a few weeks back. The hubby works for the Canadian embassy there. He was on his way to a meeting when the embassy texted him to report the bomb at Zaventem and cancelled the meeting. He got off the metro just in time to hear the explosion at the adjacent Maelbeek station.
[Lee]: "Glenn Hannibaugh regularly tells us that there are scores of ‘Sharia Courts’ already constituted in Great Britain."
Of course he does, and he's not wrong, though I can imagine how he presents it. Usually it's a case of an individual cleric being visited for advice by locals who don't know any better. A spotlight program some time back raised the case of women at risk of domestic violence being advised that they weren't entitled to divorce their husbands. This led to the police reminding imams that they were required to inform their "clients" of the law of the land when giving advice in a professional capacity. I'm sure Glen Beck paints a picture of black-robed judges lopping off hands with scimitars.
[Lee]: "...terrorizing the other guys has a long history in religion as religion. Not everybody sees religion the same way you do. It's not an exercise in clinical theology for wide swaths of people; it's a categorization, a sorting mechanism, instead."
Yes, I accept that. I'm aware that many of my own co-religionists also treat it as a community loyalty, perhaps even tribal, thing. But blowing up people in the name of god -- even if sectarian -- still strikes me as not a very religiously reflective act. A god who wants people dead on account of their sect seems rather arbitrary, even capricious... the sort of deity who should be told to get stuffed. The Sunni-Shia antipathy suggests that even being a Muslim isn't good enough for him. You gotta be the right flavour too.
[Lee]: "Okay, here's a worrier for everybody. Turns out that fracking causes the Earth to leak methane, significant quantities of methane. This is bad."
McKibben has a rep in some circles (pretty much all circles except the rabid tree huggers) for being an environmental alarmist. He's predictably over-egging things in that article. Here are some alternative views -- 1, 2. Apologies if I've failed to weed out any nutters on the opposite side of the debate ... life's too short to check for vested interests in every case.
(cont'd...)
(...cont'd)
[Marcus]: "[Sharia] is in fact commonplace in muslim communities both in the UK and elsewhere."
Sure, but in a disjointed manner, often administered by doddery old clerics. It's not the Muslim invasion people generally worry about, and it has no prospect of coalescing into a general replacement for the law of the land. I'm not suggesting it's a good (or even neutral) thing, but it's nothing to get too het up about.
[Marcus]: "COULD it be because of the massive wellfare costs of all those non working immigrants you think? Nah, you're too GOOD and PROGRESSIVE to harbour such ideas, aren't you Pete? Therefore it must be untrue."
LOL. You may be mistaking be for a liberul. I am no such thing. :-)
I'm not in favour of unrestricted migration. I'm not in favour of unrestricted welfare for economic migrants. It may well be that you get the dregs in Sweden, seeing as how it seems to be the destination of choice for so many of the economic migrants washing up on the shores of Europe. In that case, you (or your progressive governments) have oversold Sweden as a destination for welfare tourism. Other people's experience is different. In the UK, immigrants are less likely to be on welfare than the broader population. Here in Ireland, Muslim immigrants are quite likely to be well-heeled, since they are targeted by very expensive colleges offering medical and other training to Middle Eastern clients. Our main Islamic centre is in one of the most expensive parts of town.
Be all that as it may, your sleazeball videographer chose his interviewees very carefully. A dozen anecdotes does not a cogent argument make, nor do pathetic insinuations like a group of young men being "a bit gang-ish, a bit trouble-making-ish". And several of his points were outright lies. His attempts to equate welfare sponging with ISIS support is also a bit dopey. Not saying he was wrong in every detail, but he's clearly got an agenda. Even the woman he categorised as a starry-eyed multi-culty wishy washy progressive sniffed that one out from a mile away.
[Marcus]: "FACT: only 35% of the "refugees" last year were from Syria."
I don't know if that's true, but I don't dispute it either. Europe is clearly making a hash of immigration policy and needs to get its act together..
[Marcus]: "Even goody-goody-goody doo-gooders like PeteS would swiftly move his kids from a school if that school got a 50% ration of "migrant children"."
Again, you're mistaking me for some kind of 'liberul'. I readily admit that I would be uncomfortable with that sort of imbalance.
The question about ‘Sharia Courts’, whether in Great Britain or even Sweden, is whether or not they have judicial authority. In the United States one can contractually agree to binding arbitration (being binding is what distinguishes it from mediation). There are dozens of requirements before it can be invoked for real (even if it's written into the contract itself), but, satisfy the necessary requirements for size of typeface and whatever else the various states throw into those rules to make them fair (or, as fair as the politically connected are forced to allow), and it is possible to set up ones own little ‘court’ for contractual disputes.
But, that's a contractual power, not a judicial one. Judicial power may be imposed over ones objection. So, do they actually have any ‘Sharia Courts’ in Great Britain, or they just people who agree to settle their disputes with a word from the imam instead of takin’ it to a real judge?
Thanks, Petes, for the rebuttals of the McKibben article. They were reassuring.
Pete, you made three claims (and you expressed them forcefully): 1. There isn't the slightest chance of Sharia Law in Europe. 2. Muslim migrants are not very wellfare dependent. 3. Syrian refugees being mostly military age men is a falsehood.
1. That's very naive of you to say. It's in fact in practice in muslim communities today. Not the law of the land, but treated as such in many cases. Give demographics some time to work and see how the demands for it will gradually increase.
2. If they aren't in the UK then the UK is the exception. I suspect you use false numbers though. But in any case, in Norway, Denmark and Sweden they collectively draw way more from the shared coffers than they put back in. Hardly any of their women work for instance, and our wellfare state is depending on women working almost as much as men.
3. Now I say we need to look at the entire refugee situation and not limit it to Syrian refugees. Can you explain how Sweden ssuddenly has, for the first time in centuries, a male surplus? And how that surplus in the 16-17 age group is now as extreme as 123 boys for every 100 girls?
http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-35444173
"There is something odd going on with the ratio between boys and girls in Sweden. The latest estimates suggest there are 123 boys for every 100 girls among 16 and 17-year-olds. That's an even greater imbalance than in the same age group in China."
How about this graph:
http://ichef-1.bbci.co.uk/news/624/cpsprodpb/135E2/production/_88003397_asylum_seekers_age_624.png
Quite a few military age men compared to girls of similar age, wouldn't you say?
Post a Comment