blonde poker forum

I am going to regret starting this topic. I know it already.

If you've not been living on the moon for the past while, you've probably dared to log into Facebook, Twitter and various other forms of social media. If you have, there is no doubt that you'll have been confronted with barrages of hate and ignorance towards migrants - particularly those from Syria. From the relatively (and I use that loosely) benign like 'fucking foreigners coming over hear for £30 a week and a telly' to the more sinister 'I hope the entire boat sinks'/'they could all do with being gassed'*

What has happened to society that comments which are nothing less than ignorant racism and little Englanderism are now being published under real names? previously comments like this were posted under pseudonyms or quietly, now they garner a load of positive comments and a boat load of likes. If you were previously a tiny insignificant racist nobody, all of a sudden you fee quite important, so maybe you trust yourself to use your real name.

I think it's also a bit 'empty vessels rattle loudest' - and I can't possibly think that most people think like this. Still, how important is it to stand up to this wall of hate and push back? Do we need to? Or should we just accept that such idiots have always existed and will always exist?

It's absolutely terrible. I'm ashamed of humanity.

BTW- People have been saying and writing comments like those about Gypsies for the last 600 years.

We need to take more refugees in. We take shamefully few here, in part because of political cowardice

I am also of the view that we have to intervene in Syria and i didn't think i would think that after the events of the last decade. How on earth we do that without a huge backlash i have no idea

this is staggering

n 2011, Syria's population was 22.4M. Today, more than half are dead, displaced, or exiled.

http://bit.ly/1JJdgwi 

Really terrible what is going on.

It's amazing how this problem/ issue has only become obvious in the last week or so.

Atleast Germany is taking a stand to help Syrian refugees and hopefully more European nations will follow suit.

From what I can see the PMs response so far in this country has been pretty woeful.

 


 

What kind of intervention would you be advocating?

Siding with either Assad or ISIS is not as easy a decision as it might appear.

Maybe if people learnt the difference between a migrant and a refugee we wouldn't have as much rate and ignorance. Thread title not helping the cause.

Excellent point.

Was absolutely deliberate.

Take case of Syrian girl travelling to Sweden to claim political Asylum as profiled by BBC website today.

Left Syria three years ago and lived in absolute safety in Turkey since. Her mother still lives there.

Refugee or Migrant when she applies for political asylum in Sweden?

Syria> arm rebels to defeat evil despot assad, many moths later>>>fighters against the regime are mostly isis. What has happened /  is happening in Syria is a total mess, what can Britain, today do about that situation? Very little to nothing in Syria but could be doing plenty to help those fleeing the war zone.
/////

Ignorant folk don't care whether refugee or immigrant, they just hate irrationally.

I have logged on to facebook and not seen any of those comments there.  Until now, I don't think I'd seen them here either.   We know people hate without the examples. 

Tom, why are ashamed of humanity?  It is only ever a small minority who express hate like the comments quoted.  It is pretty hard for individuals to even help in this crisis, as it is very hard to get the aid to where it is most needed. 

I think it is very hard to know what to do about the problems within Syria. 

   

Which rebels have we armed in Syria? If we have done any arming of rebels, I am pretty sure it hasn't been on a large scale.

FWIW most of the opposition aren't from ISIL/ISIS, just the loudest ones.   

Yeah, I know. it's just so sad.

And Jews and Muslims and Irish and Sikhs and Poles and Indians and Pakistanis and every other minority that has ever existed.

At least people use upper case letters when they wish other minorities were dead.

Anyway, this is one particular thread I don't want to derail.

I don't think it is a derail.

The innate and ingrained racism of so many people in this country has allowed the UK government to do next to nothing, while the horror of this crisis has escalated and spiralled out of all control.

I'm ashamed of my country.

So are we saying we should allow hundreds of thousands of refugees into this country ?

Yes

Absolutely Lee.

Surely that's what our armed forces fight for, to ensure people's fundamental human rights wherever they are in the world?

There are millions of people forced out of their country, many are starving, lacking permanent shelter, lacking access to safety, work, education, medical care, etc.

Just because they had the misfortune of being born in a place that is what, a seven-year hour flight from Heathrow? The UK has taken in a few hundred of these refugees. Surely there's enough space and resources in this rich nation for every town and city to take in 10-20 refugees? Hardly a swarm migrants that will destroy this green and pleasant land.

Not even a question I think, unequivocally yes.

And we feed and house them also ?

Yes

Absolutely yes.

Why not this country along with all the others?  is it because this is the one that you live in and having them here might make some small difference to your life?

I'm sorry if that sounds a bit confrontational Lee. It wasn't meant to. But you have children, imagine how bad things must be to make those parents take such risks. They are starving and dying, our biggest problem is we eat too much every day.

Could you be the one to turn them away? I couldn't.

If you think the UK attitude sucks, here's the Czech approach. Fewer than 900 asylum applications a year and this is how they react. It's chilling when you think of the history - especially of the Sudetenland.

http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-eu-34128087

Likely these reactions are based on the Roma population here, who face unspeakable discrimination every day. Even those who aren't Roma but 'look like it' are subject to discrimination. At least until they speak English or Czech with a tourist accent. Then everything is fine again and your money is good here once more.

Yes, & NOW.

Yes, not without some inconvenience to many of us, but that won't kill us.

Just over 40 years ago, & at very short notice, 30,000 Asians, expelled from Uganda, came here. There were forebodings of gloom from many, "who will house & feed them all, how will the NHS cope, what about our jobs?"

For the most part, they turned out to be a great asset to the UK, hard working, proud, successful, &, after a while, popular. Life without them here now is unthinkable.

We'll cope Lee, we will. The Government can't just turn it's back & pretend it is not happening.  I actually believe the vast majority of people in the UK want us to carry our share of this problem.

does it not make you want to live somewhere else.  I lived in a small town for a while several years ago, and the attitude of many people there to other races was something that stuck out and was high up on the list of reasons to leave.

@ Tom ...
 I did not say that we shouldn't I merely asked should we feed and house them !!

@ tikay
I've no doubt we will cope

@ boshi
Are armed forces fight for fundamental human rights....yes

@ everyone.......

DO YOU KNOW HOW MANY OF OUR EX SERVICE MEN AND WOMEN ARE HOMLESS AND HUNGRY RIGHT NOW ???

Yes we should help refugees and no we shouldn't let them starve .....but shouldn't we be helping our own first ???

I can either move away or I can stay and try to be a positive influence. That's what I decided to do. I'm involved with some charities that some Czech friends are starting to try and change the perception of foreigners and do more for those Czech society in general shuns - particularly single mothers (double bad if you're Roma and a single mum)

Of course, Prague is very different to the rest of the country and attitudes here are way more tolerant than say, Breclav on the Austrian border or any number of Moravian towns and villages.

Please don't get me wrong ....
I do actually think we should help as much as we can!

My point being there is approximately 110000 people homeless in the UK of which 9000 are ex service personnel

I think that is a separate issue.

Equally disgraceful that it is not being addressed but I don't see it as one first then the other.

They should be parallel.

On a side I don't know how many there are? I would guess around 2500 in the UK?

we've taken in 216 Syrian refugees. saw a link last night that i will try to find

took in 25,000 ugandan asians in the 70s

75,000 Jews in the 30s

Pretty damning

(http://i62.tinypic.com/rlxhmr.jpg)

110,000 homeless, including 9,000 ex-Servicemen who deserve better, now add in, say, another 100,000 Syrians.

That's a big, big, problem. Or 210,000 little problems. Far easier to solve a lot of little problems. 

Britain receives fewer asylum seekers in a year than Germany does in a month, as polls in two countries show contrasting attitudes towards immigration

http://www.theguardian.com/world/datablog/2015/aug/27/germany-gets-27-syrian-asylum-applications-for-every-one-to-the-uk

Soon, it will be winter in Europe, cold nights, hard frosts. If we think it's bad now, imagine it in the depth of winter.

I really must find the time to translate that video embedded in Guardian article (or find a subtitled version online) because it is very powerful. Maybe at lunch.

Almost 4 times that in ex service personnel alone stu !

Lee, why does it have to be one or the other?  I see some very hateful and vile propaganda from some sources that try to play this card that we can't help one group because another is also in need. 

Can you show me one iota of evidence that suggests helping a refugee diverts a single penny from helping ex-service personnel? 

On a tangent, did you sign this petition https://www.change.org/p/foreign-secretary-william-hague-protect-all-afghan-interpreters-who-served-alongside-british-troops-and-give-them-opportunity-to-resettle - or should it only be UK-born personnel who deserve help as a priority?  If you think this petition is right, then think about each individual who has been forced from their home in Syria into the threat of starvation and a very uncertain future. Each of them will have a story, each will have a life. Just because they weren't born on an island off the north-west coast of mainland Europe doesn't mean they are less deserving of help.  Don't you think their plight is desperate and needs action immediately?

thought this was very good

by far the best of the leadership candidates, in my not very important opinion


" Why everyone should read Yvette Cooper's powerful speech on the refugee crisis http://i100.io/yxAsP0N  "

Lee - Where do these figures come from?  Genuinely interested in the definition of "Homeless" used.

http://www.crisis.org.uk/pages/homeless-def-numbers.html

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/9000-ex-service-personnel-homeless-after-2071049

Boshi please don't associate my view with those vile propaganda as you call it !

My personal view is we should first look after the people who have put their lives on the line to protect this country and the people within it
I am not saying it's one or the other !

the 216 figure i quoted earlier was wrong

its being widely quoted today

the actual figure is 2,204

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CN-Qfp8U8AA886V.png)

Why should we look after those first? Why are they more important?

Sigh !

Forgive me if I'm not understanding this properly Lee, but I've looked at those links and it says that "At worst, homelessness can mean sleeping rough on the streets"

Now I know that's terrible and should be sorted, but I don't think it should automatically give them priority over people (Entire families) who are literally dying as we speak.

We surely can't say, "Hang on, I know the boat that your children are on is sinking, but it will have to wait until we've found a flat for Private Jones".

Because you wouldn't have a country that's in a position to help other countries if it wasn't  for private jones

thats no justification

seperate issues

helping refugees

helping ex-servicemen

one shouldn't prevent the other, and policy on one shouldn't affect the other

I give up

Isn't that a catch 22 situation though?

We need Private Jones so that we can be in a position to help others, but when they need help they can't have it because we have to help private Jones.

What good is being is being in a position to help if you don't help?

I don't want to debate about how servicemen are treated post service, especially with someone who is not objective about the whole thing. I would like to make some crude comparisons though.

A policeman, a serviceman, an NHS worker, an MP, a binman and a traffic warden.

These groups all serve the public intrest, they do so going in knowing what is likely to be asked of them, what the positives and negatives are, they are all paid for there service. Why is one group suddenly more deserving after the cease their employment?

Compare this with someone who has had their entire life destroyed, the very society they have spent their whole lives in no longer exists, they have fled from probable death in most cases and all they want is some help to get started and then to join in with our society and make new lives, get jobs, raise childen, pay taxes.

If there is only enough money for one of these people then I am choosing the refugee over the former public servant.

I should state that we can fix the cause of 'Private Jones' being homeless, and we should strive to do that. As is we have to treat the symptoms of refugees as the cause is exceptionally hard to solve.

The cause of many of britains issues is our preference of green grass over people.

We would rather not build houses, for first time buyers, the homeless, refugees or anyone else as:
A) our "green and pleasant land" NIMBLY ism
B) we don't want to increase the supply of housing as it would reduce our house prices

Politically to solve the problem today is for someone to the right of Cameron (farage) to stand up and say loudly refugees are not economic migrants, I don't mind the UK helping them. The govt could then do something about it without worrying about the political backlash. (The other option is for the govt to have principles - but that is too optimistic)

Why mate? If you believe in what you are saying and we are debating sensibly why give up?

I wish I had put it like that.

I never thought I would say this, but if you were here James, I would kiss you. (Just a peck mind, and only on the cheek)

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/105991

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CN-mpx-XAAAJS7c.jpg)

Brilliant post James

Incredible New York Times mag piece on the refugee crisis with photos from one of the boats.

http://nytimes.com/migrantboats 

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CN-uXrhWEAAaXBc.jpg)

That's extraordinary.

I hope that, one day, when the major issues that caused all this have been addressed, those guys who sold the passages for $1,500 each or whatever, knowing their customers were being sent to near certain death, will have to face the music & pay for their crimes. 

This

Just when you think it can't get any worse than being stuck on that boat on deck you realise people are put below deck in these tiny boats in total darkness and only have the ability to lie down and not even stand up or see day light for days on end to increase the gangsters profits further.

Not surprisingly a no from me, that's way too many. Those we do take should also agree to go home when everything has settled. We should deffo look after Brits first before others imo.

I think the situation is well beyond that and actually completely disagree with you

I resolved to try and see your viewpoint regarding immigration the other day Woodsey, but I can see now that the gap between us is too wide.

Brit what before other what?

Brits who are uncomfortable before children who are dying?

Can we begin to imagine the conditions on those boats in those lower decks? Flushing toilets? Toilets? Nope, just crap & piss on the floor, then sit there for the next 3 days as it swills around. Drowning might just be a merciful release. 

"gangsters" indeed. Those buggers need to be first against the wall when the day of reckoning arrives. 

wonderful lead item on the news on radio 4 yesterday

"hundreds of british commuters had their travel plans disrupted today by migrants on top of trains - holiday plans and business trips were delayed for several hours as reports of footsteps being head on top on carriages was widely reported on social media..."

sorry my sympathies lay not with people's daily lives being slightly disrupted and more with the people who feel that riding a top a high-speed train is something the need to do for their families.

so much talk of how we stop people coming over, how many should we take, whose borders should we strengthen to keep us safe.

look, the world is not in equilibrium.

there are safe, rich and comfortable parts of the world. there are dangerous, squalid and poor parts of the world.

do you really think we have any choice in this matter. that we can set nice politically acceptable quotas, sure up borders vast enough that they define ciities, nations, continents and then go about our nice safe, cushty lives where our second biggest worry is our smart-tablets losing wifi access on a train [however will my friends see what i'm having for lunch, dahling..], and biggest worry hearing foriegn footsteps on top of it?

they are coming, they feel that chancing their lives below decks, atop trains and between border guards is a safer option than remaining in the place they once called home. we aint stopping poor vulnerable people fleeing dangerous and lawless parts of the world.

If I'm reading that correctly that's the numbers applying, not granted.

Either way, it's a pitiful number.  There are over 1,000 decent-sized towns in the UK.  Would adding TEN families to each of these put an unnecessary strain on the infrastructure and resources of the UK?  Would it ruin our way of life and destroy this green and 'pleasant' land?  There is no coherent argument to not helping them that I can see, other than xenophobia. If they were British people on holiday in Turkey (or wherever), we'd be chartering planes to get them to the safety and shelter of the UK. 
 

A passenger on that train was interviewed on the wireless after the train returned to St Pancras.

She complained, clearly distressed, that they could SEE these strange people outside, on the track.

The solution to this problem is the eradication of Islamic extremism.  There is no point in discussing anything else.

the 'problem' precedes that of radical islam.

the eye had an amusing inset detailing mass immigration scares and warnings of hoardes getting ready to 'swamp' us going back to '93.

amusing, but instructive.

radical islam is a huge problem though. it dis-empowers women. and you aint ending poverty without empowering women.

if there is huge disparity between parts of the world and you are fortunate enough to live atop the bell-curve then deal with the fact that people will be very desperate to enjoy a modicom of the comfort you wallow in. no amount of bleating, self-hatred [why do WE take them in, WE must be daft"] or hand-wringing around the borders of the debate [see what i did there...] is going to change that.

suck it up. you will be seeing more foreign skin tones in your beloved communities.

Why so many young Muslims are attracted to extremism is the key question.

The idea of dying a martyr in jihad is preferable to the life they are leading.

The huge inequity of wealth between rich and poor is the root cause IMO.

Human beings are basically c*nts.  Or at least lapse into c*ntlike behaviour very easily.  Its nothing to do with wealth.

 

If someone had a fantastic life why would they become a suicide bomber?

They wouldn't.

People get daft ideas.


http://listverse.com/2013/09/10/10-millionaires-who-committed-murder/

None of them have looked for martyrdom though.

I'm not convinced that every martyr has a shit life

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/isis-long-suicide-bomber-waiting-5740459

martyrdom by killing innocent people or murder by killing innocent people, I really don't care, they're both c*nts.

None of them looked for yogurt in the back of our fridge either but that doesn't prove anything.

They might have.

Do you think the root of many of these issues comes more for radical Islam or European colonials pillaging these countries for all they are worth and then leaving power vacuums behind?

Radical Islam is easily to marginalise, all you have to do is appease the moderates, without converting moderates into radicals they will loss almost all influence.

I simply do not believe there is a "long list" of people wanting to become suicide bombers.

If there was there would multiple incidents every single day.

One of the most pertinent points hasn't been mentioned yet! And that is WE are bombing Syria!!

If you decide to drop bombs on a country and then refuse to help the innocent families fleeing for their lives from the very war zone you have created then that is pretty slack behaviour. No matter what other troubles exist in the world...that is slack behaviour.

We see it time and again. We just don't consider the implications and the aftermath before we press the red button.

How to battle radicalism? Let's start by slinging the preachers of hate out of our country rather than nodding wisely about the virtues of free speech. Then we would have more space for innocent families.

Would really like someone who has this opinion of "helping our own" first to please answer this question, I'm genuinely very interested in the thought process and this type of discussion has come up on here so many times and goes down the same path but the people on that side of the arguement never answer this question, I've asked it numerous times and never had a response.

Why don't you support PSV Eindhoven?

I do, they are my Dutch team.

Because they aren't in boats drowning along with their wives and kids.

There are, 50+ a month, they're just not reported unless Westerners are amongst the casualties.

http://cpostdata.uchicago.edu/search_new.php

this was in june

i wonder if public opinion has changed in recent days?

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CN_m0xIW8AAuMiX.jpg)

Anyone got any data on how many refugees have been taken in by Saudi Arabia,United Arab Emiratesand some of the other wealthy petro chemical Muslim countries or is that all a little bit to inflammatory to ask. This is a really complex global issue and it's far to easy to slip into rhetoric. Countries without borders are no longer countries. Turkey and Greec are shouldering to much of the burden and yes the UK could do more. However there are some very wealthy countries in the vicinity who are spending their wealth building shopping malls and Skyscrapers,airlines and football clubs.

Ptsd and mental illness would be my reasoning. I'm aware it affects more than just people from the military (well I imagine police officers/fireman/emergency response can suffer from it and I've read some awful stories about what emergency service operators have heard).

An mp would earn more and have much better job prospects too.

It's an awful situation and the UK just aren't pulling the weight we should. Find a way to get some more of ax off the corporations instead of letting them hand it off to shareholders. Maybe not subsidise rail companies who then go on to hand out dividends to shareholders.

Yes the UAE can and should do more, so should we, pointing fingers at even worse offenders is like the kid who gets caught stealing 1 biscuit and points out little Johnny stole 2.

Ok so MP is at bottom of the list, I would probably agree with that. I would imagine though a serviceman would have some money saved up at the end of his/her service, I believe they often receive housing/housing help and leave the military with varied skill sets which enable them to seek skilled employment post service. Pretty sure traffic wardens don't get that so for the moment I'm going refugee>traffic warden>service personnel>MP's

The UAE and Saudi Arabia should definitely be doing more. But they're hardly bastions of human rights.

Looks like the UK will be taking 'some'  more, but hardly seems enough. That article does explain where the 200 number comes from.

http://gu.com/p/4c4hj

It's not political , it's not economics , it's not pointing fingers and blaming people.

It's about humanity.

Agree with Tighty . Never ever thought I would say it after upsetting the apple cart in Iraq
but action is needed NOW. In what form I would not have a clue but world leaders need to
act rather than talk.

Whatever plan of action they are implementing at the minute , well , it's obviously not working.

If the pictures of the last few days hasn't brought home that message to people than it's a sad
reflection of modern times.

Churchill would have been up and at em , and I don't mean the dog.

Are you actually serious with this post ?

Yes they get some help for housing but often it isn't enough and doesn't really compensate for the mother of the household struggling to find work as she may not speak the language like in Germany. Some servicemen do get extra skills and the military do provide some £ toward retraining and these sorts of things but your posts are very narrow minded. An engineer might have skills that translate to civilian life well but the bog standard infantryman won't.

I'm not sure why you would expect servicemen to have the ability to save money when the average family in the UK can't. I don't think a family would receive any sort of special benefit or allowancd for housing if they weren't based abroad. Your reasoning for savings is nonsense and applies equally to traffic wardens as much as it dies servicemen and completely fails to meet my point regarding mental health and those sorts of issues servicemen face.

I remember when I was close to serving the recruiters were using the fact that I would come out of service with a strong set of skills that would see me assimilate into civilian life and into a decent job, along with some money in the bank. Those weren't the motivation forces for me to join the armed services but it was certainly good to know the years spent in service wouldn't be detrimental to my advancement in a civilian career.

Our government has a duty of care to all homeless citizens, I don't see why a homeless man who was in the armed forces is more important to one who used to empty our bins.

You posted as I was writing, the basis of my comments about the financial situation were what i was told by recruiters, it might be that it is no longer the case or that was just what they said to try and get people to sign, I don't know either way and have no other knowledge on the subject.

Ok makes sense. Hope I'm not too fiery had an emotional day.

You are being utterly ridiculous royal flush!!
A private soldier protects this country that you live in for about 18k a year
A dustmen earns 25k a year
A soldier has to go to war see his mates maimed and killed
A dustmen might get a smelly bin if he's unlucky
A soldier has to deal with the things he sees and does for the rest of his life
A dustmen goes home and has a meal with his family

Of course he should be housed at yes the front of the que

Leaving the forces is no different to any other walk of life in terms of job change. Some will be equipped with specialist marketable skills, some will have a good set of transferable soft skills and some will struggle. If you serve for 22 years and perhaps pick up a war pension then you will be relatively well looked after financially.

What is different compared to most walks of life is the impact the job may have on you. It's easy to agree with Lee that special consideration is merited for those that have had harrowing experiences - often leading to the mental health issues others have alluded to and a struggle to integrate into a non-institutionalised life.

The fact that we don't support our ex-servicemen, with issues, very well is obviously not a reason to hold back on our help with the refugees. I cannot begin to wrap my head around the concept of 'helping our own first' - I don't even know who 'our own' are.

I know a lot of this has been said but I think people are a little quick to dismiss Lee's perspective in quite such an offhand way. Ranking traffic wardens ahead of ex-servicemen is just a tad silly - make an equivalence case if you like but ahead .. gtfo Flushy

if we're giving houses out on the basis of low-income, the horrors people have seen, lengthy periods living in war-ravaged countries and lack of family life, then the calais migrants should be right at the front of that queue, innit.

So would a nurse go in front or behind the ex-solider?  What about an ex-heart surgeon?  What if the soldier was foreign, or if the nurse was a daughter of an immigrant?

Of course, none of this matters.  Those with the greatest need should be looked after first.  Simples.

The idea that those with an urgent need are taking away aid from others who have a serious, but less urgent need, is nonsense.  The way it's often portrayed as "A v B", or "A or B", is not only dangerous and divisive, it's also a lie.

Reminds me of this:

(http://i24.photobucket.com/albums/c17/JCtheMessiah/Cake%20-%20A%20banker%20a%20tabloid%20reader%20amp%20an%20immigrant.jpg)

I was making a point of how silly flushy was being when he made a list of importance

I was referring to the notion that ex-servicemen will be denied housing because of Syrian refugees.

Exactly my point, a list of importance is silly.


Glad you have come around to see our viewpoint.

Confused by the confusion about 'help your own'.

RED-DOG you often highlight the persecution of Gypsies, as you have done in this thread. I'm guessing it's because ur a Gypsy. I'm also guessing leethefish was in the armed forces. You guys are free to highlight the plight of many different groups..yet choose to 'help your own'.

Simple human nature to express a preference for folk you consider brethren,

I've typed several replys and just deleted them I really don't think there is any point in this debate any longer

I highlighted the persecution, i didn't say they should take precedence.

I wonder if with hindsight we now consider "The Arab Spring" which involved the overthrowing all or most of those dictators to be a good thing or not.

Are we any closer to an answer to Mondatoos question? Why British people first?

Also, for the people banging the armed forces drum....

The armed forces personnel were made to go and fight and protect British interests, were they?

Well certainly not in the sense that they were made to leave their homes, abandon all they know and seek new pastures they weren't.

I'm passed even being arsed about answering this question because I know your itching to tell us why those of us who think that are wrong with the usual finger wagging that comes with it, but if you want to anyway knock yourself out mate.

The finger wagging can be done without knowing the reason behind the nationalist views.

I can't see why revealing the reasoning behind those views would open you up to any more criticism, plus its not like you to be shy  ;danafish;

Genuinely interested btw if that didn't come across

a- because I'm on holiday and I have better things to do
b-because the finger wagging happens whatever my answer is, it's just the magnitude of finger wagging that varies lol

Because as a country we have a finite power to do good and it makes sense this should be spent on those closest to home.

This isn't my view btw just an argument I'm curious to see countered.

I think your remarks about the armed forces are rather disparaging Mulhuzz. I met someone from the army recently, we were both half cut and I asked him a very personal question of "Why did you join the armed forces, I thought about it when I was younger and I couldn't fight for something I don't always believe in." He told me he has seen the good they have done in places like Afghanistan where people have faced horrible oppression. He could see a difference in the civilians around him. They signed up to do a job and I don't think you should blame individuals for something politicians have made them do. The Forces do make a difference in these places and whilst the impact of it may come with problems and may even be incorrect or something you disagree with, do not blame the individual.

It does surprise me how people who are so pro refugee can be seemingly so against helping homeless people in Britain. Does it not worry you that there is a unusually high proportion of homeless people that are ex servicemen? I'm as pro refugee as it comes but the arguments have come too far the other way in the topic. I hope my views come across as well as Nirvanas post, I tried to say a very similar thing.

I've had this discussion in the past with you and you never answered it previously, and we've always got along fine on here so I don't think you would've felt I was doing that, would be very surprised if you did.

Same with Lee, always got on fine with him here so wouldn't expect him to think I was baiting.

No nothing to do with you mate didn't think you were baiting or anything, missed it when you first posted it as I've only really been skimming the topic that's all.

The answer to the question is because there is a contract over many years between a State and its citizens which works both ways.

in this case the human tragedy outweighs that but when people want to 'put Brits first' this is the argument many would be using rather than xenophobia imo.

You're right, I was trying to make the point that this kind of straw man argument is ridiculous.

However, I was 9 pints of Czech beer to the wind on a school night, so it didn't come across quite as eloquently as I'd have liked and I look like I am simply bashing the armed forces. That is absolutely not my intention!

For what it's worth, I'm very much both anti-homeless and pro-refugee. In the end, those two things are really the same thing. I'm trying to say that lists of importance or where we should 'start' are silly. The problems are not mutually exclusive. We can solve both. And we should.

Re homelessness though, I wouldn't be a fan of solving homelessness only for the armed forces - the approach has to be holistic. It may be ofc that there are special circumstances affecting the armed forces which make homelessness more likely, I honestly don't know. If that's the case, then we should solve that problem, but as a particular intervention in a wider gamete of treatments.

It's 2015 in one of the richest countries on the planet. Nobody, ex serviceman, nurse, bin man or those fleeing war in their own countries should be left without a home.

They did take precedence by the very fact you highlighted the plight of that group instead of any other group.

I did not.

Perhaps you could look back through the thread and count up the number of times I referenced the plight of the refugees v the number of times I referenced the Gypsies.

You are then more than welcome to GTFO.  ;snoopy'sguns;

And before you make any smart Alec remarks remember this. I have my finger at the ready an I am totally prepared to wag it.

This has been a very civilised debate so far - we wouldn't want it to decline to the point where people started wagging fingers at each other - we're not animals.

Yo, I did look back and hey presto you highlight the plight of Gypsies on the first page of a thread about Syrian refugees. Wag away Mr Preference.

Exactly.

Finger wagging should be limited to the HUD's debate.

My only view on this whole subject, is that people with topknots should be helped last.

I think that's a given.

Undoubtedly yes.

A post on Facebook from one of my friends


Just a little thought for do gooders. I and my mates served in Bosnia 94. We done more than enough escorting food and humanitarian aid through the country. We kept checkpoints secure so aid could reach the vulnerable. We saw the aftermath of a country wrecked and ravaged by war. Kids we saw with nothing no clothes on there backs or food to eat. I am fed up to the back teeth of do gooders and lefties. Go and do a  tour in a ravaged land. And see how the British army is the best at hearts and minds and helping the poorest of the poor!


I was also in Bosnia in 1994
i thought it said perhaps why I felt quite strongly

but no one is doubting that, or the role of the armed forces and specifically the good they can do in a humanitarian sense

just that the issue of problems for servicemen ex-service is a different issue from that of refugees and that to suggest that "helping our own" first or a subset of "our own" first rather misses the point, and they shouldn't take priority in some people's opinion

I am not sure I understand.  Why are you fed up of people wanting to do good?  You have previously done good yourself.  I just don't follow the reasoning.

If you are setting yourself up in a group that is distinct from do-gooders, then what does that make you?

A do-badder? A do-nothinger?

So instead of doing good now we should go to 1990s Bosnia and do good.

Yup, makes loads of sense.

This post makes no sense whatsoever

Of course I want to do good and help these people but all the do gooders come out the wood work when something is so prominent in the news
They actually do fuck all (most of them) to help anyone apart from type on a keyboard that we should be doing something !

For what's it's worth I am working with a charity soldiers of the street ....to actually do something
These people actually do nothing but put people like me down for saying what the vast majority think but won't say .

As in my previous post I do do something unlike most of you keyboard warriors

My heart goes out to these people as it does to all homeless people, people living in poverty anywhere in the World.
Hypothetical question. The Government say we will take as many refugees as is possible but they request that anyone that has a spare room/s or a second home will house these people in the short term for a mnimal or no payment would YOU be at the front of the queue with an offer ?

Yes I would ! But only after all of the people already here in this country have a bed to sleep in

I understand what you mean, Lee, about how people are quick to say "somebody needs to help these people" without doing anything to help the cause, but is it a realistic thing to expect your everyday person to drop all they're doing with their lives and go and become an activist? The majority of people simply can't go out and help first hand due to other commitments, such as family and work. What you're doing is fantastic, fair play to you for going out there and working for a charity close to your heart. I've also done a large amount of charity work in the past, but I don't think it's fair to then expect everyone else to be in the same position.

Keep doing what your doing with your volunteer work though, kudos.

Lee, I said the same on Facebook that I do believe your heart is in the right place and you are genuinely concerned about the plight of homeless people in the UK, especially those who are ex-service.  That's a thing to be proud of, and something I support as well.

But then you criticise others for having an opinion or a stance on the refugee crisis; those who state that the UK government should do more, open our country up to help rescue more of these people who are having a terrible time.  I pay my taxes, I live in a democracy, I want (no, I expect) the 'elected' government to do the humane and morally right thing and help these people, these human beings. You seem to make a point that the two are mutually exclusive and if a refugee is brought into the UK, it's at the expense of a British soldier who needs housing.  That simply isn't and shouldn't be the case. 

I support (and donate) towards cancer research. That doesn't mean that I don't think that money should be spent on Alzheimer's, heart disease, MS, etc.  Extending the analogy, would I be right to say I only want money and research to go towards fighting cancer, and until that's sorted we shouldn't do anything to fight the other horrible diseases?  Of course I wouldn't. 

Whilst this is a complex problem, there is no doubt that the West and USA have screwed up big time over the Middle East.

It goes back as centuries but in recent times the ideal that we have some moral superiority over others is part of the problem.

Trying to impose our Western concept of democracy in the Middle East shows how clueless our leaders have been.

For me, the biggest catalyst for this change was our reaction to 9/11. Going into Iraq (however bad Hussain was) was total madness. The desire of Bush and Blair to leave their mark on history has left an horrendous legacy. It was the biggest recruitment sergeant the extremists could have wished for and events since have only accelerated the problems.

What a nightmare.  

  

+1

Just to clarify the YOU wasn't directed solely at you Lee it was a YOU in general to ALL people

This fucking silent majority bullshit annoys the living fuck out of me.

In going to quote from a YouTube video made by two German comedians responding to people making this kind of claim. Since the video is quite long, I'm going to paraphrase:

'Dear Misters 'I'm not a racist but-', professor 'hobby provocateur' and others,

....
Previously people were punks if they wanted to be contrarian, now you're a Patriot. You think you're the silent majority, saying what everyone is thinking, you call a spade a spade and stick your finger in the wound and you won't be dictated to by anyone. Call your selfs nationalists, Patriots, the silent majority, even William Wallace himself: you are egregious morons and you are not the majority. This country and this society will not tolerate your bullshit.

But no worries, we are under no illusions that you'll change your option, but at some point you'll pack your flags away, stop marching, come to your senses and be ashamed of your actions this summer for the rest of your lives; or end up on the Jeremy Kyle show.

Refugees welcome.'

This rallying against 'lefties' and 'do gooders' (whatever the fuck that means...) does nothing but detract from the issue and make the speaker feel important.

Well fuck that. Stop fucking chirping and start solving this problem like the rest of us. This problem will not be solved without everyone putting all their resources into it. So shut up and crack the fuck on. Or get your self to Jeremy Kyle.

I agree the actions of the Western World have probably helped escalate the problem of extremism etc. However, imo we DO have moral superiority over many parts of the world. I am talking about those countries that kill hundreds of thousands of their own people in ethnic cleansing, do not allow women to have educations, have public executions in football stadiums for women accused of adultery, and loads of other simply horrendous stuff. I am all for moral relativism, but I still believe that most western countries - whilst still being dodgy in many ways - are morally superior to many of these horrible regimes. I remember a while back it seemed to be the liberal left (of which I consider myself to be a part) who were the most ardent apologists for the 'cultural differences' of many Islamic states. Their argument was that we should not judge cultures that are different to ours - in other words if it is their culture to have, say, enforced female genital mutilation, then it would be intolerant of us to criticise them for that. Maybe it makes me intolerant - I don't think so! - but I just cannot get on board with this concept.

BTW, I see that a similar argument was being used a short time ago by right wingers in the USA about gay marriage (and other things). They were arguing that gay marriage supporters were guilty of intolerance because they were not taking into account the views of those who think it is against God's will. In other words, they are saying "you are intolerant for not tolerating my intolerance"! Scary that this is being accepted by some people as a valid argument.

"Well fuck that. Stop fucking chirping and start solving this problem like the rest of us."

Can you clarify exactly what problems you are solving?  All I can see is you shooting off on an internet forum having a go at people who don't see things exactly as you do.

We clearly need to join other countries in offering refuge to the people involved in this human tragedy.  Most people on the thread agree.

Of those that aren't sure, nobody has been out of line so I don't know why it needs your santimonious hectoring whenever anyone has an alternative point. 

Well said, these people aren't running away from Bush and Blair, they are running away from utter bastards who should be executed en masse.

They aren't running from Bush or Blair, but those two helped create the environment that let the extremists thrive. They left Iraq with no creditable plan within the context of their culture and effectively left a vacuum partly being filled by IS. Their actions helped the extremists and gave them a powerful PR/recruitment weapon.

We should have left Hussain in power - he was not a problem in 9/11 terms - Bush and Blair went on their mad crusade which was the worst foreign policy decision in 50 years.

One quick point - in historical terms we have very little grounds to play the "our morals are better than yours" card. In fact when you look at the way we exploited other countries resources and people we are on a very sticky wicket.

It made me smile about a year ago when Prince Charles was having a pop at Putin over the Crimea. Putin basically said he wasn't taking any lessons from us with our colonial history. Putin had a point!!

You really need to start speaking to people on here as you would in real life. I highly doubt you would say some of the stuff you write here to somebodies face, you would have a huge problem with some people if you did....

These bastards didn't start up in Iraq or Libya where we intervened, but in Syria where we didn't.  I absolutely didn't agree with the Iraq war, but we shouldn't blame ourselves for these all the problems in the middle East.  Iran and Iraq were fighting well before we intervened as were Iraq and Kuwait.  The Taliban were behaving like absolute turds before bin laden moved there and well before 9/11 and the war in afganistan.  What would hace happened if we hadn't intervened anywhere is an unknown.

Wow !!!
Why would you type this when you clearly wouldn't say that shit to my face !

Whatever has been said for or against the discussion we've had I think you've very much just crossed that line !

How dare you say these things !

i am being very controlled with this post as I feel it will do nothing to the debate by retaliating

And feel I might say a little too much.

(http://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/624/cpsprodpb/B711/production/_85356864_etter976.jpg)

Ridiculous how easily the media can change public perspective; scary actually..

Had someone telling me "we've all wanted immigrants out of our country for ages, what's suddenly changed?".

He then continued to say that his opinions weren't informed by the tabloid press.

Kudos Austria.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-34161109

(http://i1173.photobucket.com/albums/r600/leeethefish/2015-09/EA3877F3-B653-4EC5-82AA-78C006CFF5DB.png) (http://s1173.photobucket.com/user/leeethefish/media/2015-09/EA3877F3-B653-4EC5-82AA-78C006CFF5DB.png.html)

do you think thats true Lee?

these people fleeing for their lives are thinking about benefits?

How many countries are they traviling thru which are safe ?

read this, then the full article

"There is a widely held belief that asylum seekers have detailed knowledge of policies in destination countries – for example, recognition rates, opportunities for employment and access to welfare benefits – as that they make rational and informed choices about where to claim asylum based on this knowledge. These assumptions are reflected in the nature of political debates around asylum over the past decade, in public attitudes towards asylum seekers and refugees, and in the tone and content of media headlines. The desire of refugees living in makeshift camps around Calais in the hope that they can find a way to enter the UK is frequently cited as ‘evidence’ of this.

Research undertaken for the Refugee Council and published in January 2010 challenges these assumptions. Based on in-depth interviews with refugees and asylum seekers, a number of whom arrived as separated children, the research investigates the decisions made by asylum seekers who come to the UK and explores the extent to which these decisions are a reflection of chance or choice. It builds upon the growing, but as yet still limited, body of evidence about the ‘choices’ that individuals are (or are not) able to exert over the country in which they will seek asylum, and the factors that might contribute to the decision making process."

http://www.swansea.ac.uk/international/global-research/whyasylumseekerscometotheuk/

lets see if we can educate you to get rid of this xenophobia

specifically

"The decision to come to the UK
Less than a third of the research participants specifically wanted to come to the UK. For those that did, the presence of family and friends and a belief that their human rights would be respected were the most important factors underlying that decision. For some the decision to come to the UK was opportunistic and motivated by the fact that it was possible to obtain travel documents, or make use of an existing visa. Respondents from Zimbabwe appear more consciously to have decided to come to the UK compared with other nationalities.

Just over two-thirds of respondents did not choose to come to the UK. This includes all but one of those who arrived as separated children. In very many cases respondents described having little or no knowledge of the UK. Some were aware of the existence of Europe but had no knowledge about the differences between individual countries (or even that individual countries existed).

The single most important reason why these asylum seekers had ended up in the UK was because a decision to bring them here had been made by others, usually by an agent. Most only became aware that they were going to the UK after leaving their country of origin. Some, including many of those who arrived as children, only found out that they were in the UK after their arrival. Some people wanted to go to countries other than the UK but were unable to do so. This reflects the lack of choice that many asylum seekers have over the destination country."

Warning. The next post contains a graphic image.

Like the way you've got Ukraine marked down as No War in your little map there Lee.

Worried about benefits? I don't think so.



(https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQBBzxnVgNF15VMu_Wih6vMDlUAyqsbXufzhgARLT21a6lWobpM)

I wrote a really long reply to this but then I lost the Internet connection and on reload it's not there. Sigh.

Basically, the map isn't 'about right', people don't come here for benefits (in fact they barely come at all) and people should be allowed to settle wherever they like within the EU once granted asylum anyway.

Over 4m people displaced by crisis in Syria.

3.2x million of them in Turkey and Lebanon alone, but yes they are all coming to the UK, Germany and Sweden for less money (whilst asylum claim being decided) than in France or Italy and for subsequently a welfare state they don't have access to either in whole or in part.

Benefits, I guarantee you, is the last thing on their minds.

You post shit like this and you wonder why mulhuzz types the things that he does?

You should be ashamed of yourself.

And before you ask, I WOULD be happy to say it to your face.

You don't need to educate me or patronize me Tighty

These are my opinions to which I am entitled to.

After your recent post towards me mulhuzz I won't ebb read what you have to say.

Posted without comment so will assume one of two things:

1. Has genuinely held belief that this is the case - in which case Tightys posts are excellent on education.

2. Posted it to provoke, in which case I refer you to 'dear hobby provocateur'

my post actually wasn't aimed at you, I happened to be quoting you when talking about the socalled 'silent majority' attitude.

However, the map makes clear that I really should have aimed it more directly at you.

Unfortunately, opinions are like arseholes, everybody has them; even when they stink.

I note with interest that you defend your right to have an opinion, yet I was asked 'how dare I write these things?' - I don't wish to derail the thread though, so I'll leave it there.

My last post on this subject and probably on blonde.

The main issue for me is you all want to be seen to be saying the correct thing the things you think are to be true and what is politically correct.

I've said several times before I thing we should help the refugees ....but not before the thousands of homeless we already have.

I have been literally talked to like a piece of shit for expressing my views by mulhuzz without anyone stepping up to say something apart  from woodsy,
 this I think is disgusting he was bang out of order.

I posted the picture not to get a reaction or to be patronized or be educated ....but to which I didn't get the chance was to ask the views on what people thought of it and why it was correct or not.

I've only see this thread tonight and am shocked at some of it's content. These people for the most part have had their world ripped apart. They have no future unless we give it to them. They have no country to call their own, no education for their kids, no help for their elderly.

Our Government today pledged to take 20,000 refugees over the next 5 years. WTF. The talk the other day was for us to take 25,000 immediately.

Here's a post I put on a Blonde friends FB thread the other day.


"I've just unfriended someone for their bigoted, ill thought out and unfounded views on allowing more of these poor people into the UK to give their families the hope of a better life. The talk of 25,000 people adding to our population is nothing. Our population is 65 million, 25k is approx .04%. It's like putting a grain of sugar in a sugar bowl. I feel more unfriending may occur."

I couldn't give a shit about being politically correct.

I don't care if people see me saying the right thing or wrong thing.

My view is if there are men, women and children dying, in an attempt to leave their country because they are in danger of being killed, and this country can help them, then why shouldn't we?

Imagine if it was you and your family. What would
You think then?

Lee, I've said this several times before on this thread. The refugees can't wait. They are dying as we speak.

Are the US taken any refugees.. or is it seen as a purely EU issue?..

Its also interesting how we are controlled and manipulated by the media... pre poor child washed up on a beach there were just mumblings of help.. post and all the do gooders are inviting them to live with them..  does it really take a massive poke with a a sharp stick to our guilty conscience for something to be done..

The situation is tragic beyond belief... and something has to be done but its incredibly vile to see these people stand up and make promises they would never keep just to be seen and heard to be doing the right thing...

Who are these people and how we know they wouldn't keep their promises?

Genuine question BTW, has there been a news story I've missed or something?

Why should we concern ourselves with what America are
Doing?

twats like this..empty words all for political gain..

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/sep/06/nicola-sturgeon-and-yvette-cooper-offer-to-house-syrian-refugees

im assuming this is a global crisis and as the US leads the bombing of Syria they might take some responsibility for the people they displaced.. also it was simply a question if they were or not .. not a question about their fundamental stance

What they say might be the truth or it might not, we have no way of knowing, but why attack the people who say we should help instead of attacking those who say we shouldn't?

And why do people say "Do gooders" like it's something to be ashamed of?

Assad has clearly lead the bombing of Syria.  Russia has sat behind him.

The U.S. has been by far the biggest donor to the UNHCR appeal for Syria.   I think they had provided something like 40% of the funding.  Russia have provided about 0.1% of the US funding.

these are the only people that are saying we should help ? think theres a pretty strong consensus  by most of the civil thinking world that something should be done.. is it really necessary for them to actually say this... am happy to be wrong and apologise profusely as Nicola Sturgeon welcomes her first Syrian family to live with her.. forgive me for being so cynical but people like Sturgeon only ever say anything for one reason and one reason only..to further their own agenda.. to believe anything else is naive .

People who do real good.. never shout about it or want recognition.. 'The DoGooders' in reference are the ones who want to be seen to be doing something so they can all feel good about themselves as they sit in their comfy chair and deal with their first world problems of whether to buy a Mercedes or a BMW next time

U.S. Defo complicated.

Good overview here. They can and should do more.

http://www.newsweek.com/why-us-not-doing-more-help-syrian-refugees-369539

That said, they are the largest provider of humanitarian funding anywhere, so not just all about resettlement etc.

tbh... it was a general question

That's just fundamentally not true.

Charities do loads of good all the time and they want to scream and shout and be recognised. Not because they are 'do gooders' in your sense of the word but because it helps awareness and helps them do more.

It's a frightfully British attitude (and not always in lock step with the rest of the world) that 'doing good' should be a thing kept quiet. More often than not it should be shouted loudly and celebrated to raise awareness. Nothing wrong with being British about it ofc, just making the point it's not only way ;)

Also it's clear that there are some people who gain utility from giving like you describe btw, just don't think correct to say all/generalise.

Your right of course..just referencing the minority.. 'DoGooders'-  someone who does things that they ​think will ​help other ​people, ​although the other ​people might not ​find ​their ​actions ​helpful... Cambridge Dictionary

The UK has been the 4th biggest donor after the U.S., Kuwait and the EU.  Read Twitter and Facebook and you'd think Cameron had been telling them to F off.

A big old gap between perceptions and reality.

Dean, yr talking bollo

I said something supportive about yr original framing of a discussion about servicemen and the help I also think they merit. And now you post something that is just propagandist & ill conceived and I wish I hadn't given you the benefit of the doubt.  If you post bigoted, hate filled shiz with no comment .. er well people are gonna brand you a bigot.

Is that like King Rollo ? :)

nice

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CONID49WIAA5ILQ.jpg)

Wonderful.

Posts this BS on facebook as well lolz. GG friends.

 ;applause;

Interesting that nobody (other than the evil Lee) has answered this question so I'm going to be brave.

I have a couple of spare rooms and if a complete stranger came knocking at my door seeking refuge from his/her war torn country I would probably hide behind the curtains until they tried next door.

Everybody wants to fix these problems but in reality an incredibly tiny minority will actually do anything about it other than shout and rant. If one of that tiny minority are present on this thread then I applaud you, you are a latter day saint.

This is such a sensitive subject at the moment thanks to the media and social media in particular. Fortunately like everything else it'll go away soon enough (in media terms, not reality terms) so we can all go back to worrying about when the iPhone 7 is going to be released instead.

Well I'm certainly not a saint Matt, latter or present day, but if a refugee stranger, especially someone with children came to my door I would definitely find them a bed and some food and try to help if I could.

We as a family have tried to help, albeit in a small way. We collected up what clothing, utensils, pots, pans, plastic sheeting and bedding we could and took them to a collection point. (well Mrs Red did) It's not much, but it's something.

I don't think we're a tiny minority, I think there are millions who would help if they could.

I agree there is quite a big distance between wringing ones hands and saying something should be done and actually putting oneself out to do something. Having said that, I believe what is needed most pressingly is Government intervention and so ranting in social media, signing petitions etc is actually quite a valid way to express ones humanity and express a desire/give permission to our Government to provide more help than is already provided.

My wife is Austrian and my sister in law works in a refugee center in a small village in the Tirol that was originally set up during the Balkan conflicts. I have seen some of the good that is done first hand. Would I house someone as an interim measure ? I wouldn't relish it, I'd prefer it was for a relatively short period but I would do it.

I would use crown land to build some sort of temporary camp until we can secure the refugees more permanent accomodation.

And yes, we have enough spare room in our house to put up a small family.

I think they'd probably sooner stay where they are, than live with me and my parents ;D

10 years ago, I'd have not even given it a second thought, which is quite sad, but indicative of how little interest I had in anything bar myself.

I only took much notice of this when I started seeing the Britain First style propaganda on Facebook, and having done a bit of reading, I wouldn't mind having people stay with me, if it was feasible.

TBF  I think any decent human being faced with a truly desperate family with small children would offer shelter and food but the onus is not on the individual .. we have a first world government who have structures and plans in place for dealing with things like this..and the people that make these hollow offers know this.

Its good your doing your little bit Tom and it does add up and Kudos to you.. I hope the two bags of clothes i donated last week end up on a worthwhile back ( although they may think things have got worse when they get one of my spangly t shirts )

But you are already helping Tom as it is your taxes that make up the what is it ? £1 billion now the government has pulled out of its foreign aid budget

There is absolutely no chance I would let a stranger sleep in my house. So ok the dude is a refugee but does that mean he's certain to be a great guy who deffo won't clip you in ur sleep? Or do one with all your worldly goods in the middle of the night?? Think some of you guys are intoxicated by the fumes of charitable assumption. Sure I guess he can pitch a tent in my garden, maybe sort him out with a bacon roll, but sleep in my spare room? No thanks, I live in the real world where bad things clearly do happen.

The mrs asked "What do you think of Syria?" I said "Apart from Juventus or Roma I can't see any other team winning it this season".

Is it bad that I laughed at that? Yep I know, I'm going straight to hell.

See you at the gates mate ;)

Teeside is looking to lead the way on taking refugees. Haha these poor buggers think theyve seen a bombsite.

People continue to say that people coming on boats are fleeing a warzone which isnt technically true. They are fleeing refugee camps to try to get to a country to make a better life. I dont blame them and would still gladly accept them but have the concern that the financially better off are escaping what are probably pretty grim conditions in these camps in turkey/lebanon etc, while the probably more needy are simply stuck. The family who have caused a lot of the change in public opinion were living in turkey two years before their death.

Also sickened by camerons decision to release months old news about a syrian air strike, which was contrary to a commons vote, straight after the events of the weekend, to avoid criticism. Stinks of labour slimy tactics on releasing bad news on the back of worse news.

Was amused by poland and czechs saying they dont want immigrants, yeah well your own people dont want to live there so why the hell would these people.

I think we should call everyone's bluff.  Whatever government decides to house but then add a family for Sturgeon and Cooper and four families for Geldoff and allocate them for the 2/3 years it takes to sort the citizen application.  Everyone wins.

Dont incourage the tories, theyll be saying theyve found a solution to the bedroom tax.

lived in near Teeside and live in Prague. I know where I'd rather live...

Been to Teesside lately?

And even if your stereotypical comment had some truth in it, at least the incoming refugees will get a decent welcome.

No stereotyping would have been to say only children are welcome.

Yes, daily, it was a joke. The comment, not the place. Id invite them to tyneside as we have plenty of coats not being used or they can have the spare housing in sunderland if we they can remember where they left their keys

The impression has been given that the government is funding the cost of Britain's contribution to resolving the refugee situation, whereas it is actually allocating zero additional funding. The money it will give to Councils will be diverted from within the existing Overseas Aid budget, so the cost will be borne by Bangladesh, Ethiopia and other African and Asian countries as we cut back on allocations for drinking water programmes, education, fighting malaria and so on, so we can deal with the refugee crisis.

Should the government not be paying for the refugee costs from additional funding rather than by diverting existing spending from the programmes where it is badly needed?

and so something really positive about our country is really a negative?

http://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2015/mar/09/uk-passes-bill-law-aid-target-percentage-income (http://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2015/mar/09/uk-passes-bill-law-aid-target-percentage-income)

The 0.7% commitment was established by the UN in 1970. In 2013, only five other countries – Sweden, Norway, Luxembourg, Denmark and the United Arab Emirates – had met or exceeded the 0.7% aid spending target. The Netherlands had consistently met the target, but fell short in 2013.

I think they should probably spend it where it is most needed and at least if it goes to the refugee crisis then we know that we aren't using it as a makeweight in an arms deal; to support an unpopular leader; to ingratiate ourselves with China/India etc.

.

Ahh, didn't realise you were a Broon Ale man. Fair enough.
Running on Sunday?

Why do they throw away the food/water/aid they are given?

All of them?  this is Hungary, right?

I managed to find some videos from Hungary(wish this was one of the trivia questions) alongside the ones of the refugees getting thrown food in cattle pens.

As it was by a train, I assume the people who are now offering food are the same ones declining them transport to Germany or other country or transporting them to the refugee camps instead.  I assume they have a grudge for this or some previous unseen mistreatment.

It really isn't normal refugee behaviour.  Even the cattle pen refugees seemed glad of the food, so somebody must have done something to really piss the others off.

You just have to assume context is everything and without that we really have no idea why it is happening. 

am a little puzzled... why would you go back to the place you were running from for your life..is it safe there now ?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3222135/Syrian-boys-Aylan-Galip-Kurdi-s-father-returns-Kobane-bury-sons-wife.html

I can totally understand it. He has lost everything. If your wife and both your young children have been killed, you're going to feel that there is no point in carrying on. His dream was for his family. What is the point in trying to fulfill it now? He probably doesn't care any more whether he gets killed.

They werent hungary

Technically I think the vote was whether to bomb Assad, but the drone strike was against ISIL who are Assad's enemy. Which has a certain irony.

Frankly that we can bomb ISIL in Iraq but not Syria is crazy as the borders now mean nothing.

If in doubt, bomb them.

A lot of people have managed not to do all their money on smugglers and can afford basic things themselves still.

It's a form of protest when the authorities are handing it out and what gets televised on the news. They don't want food and water, they want safety and respect.

Also, they are leaving it so others behind can take it who will come along shortly. Aid comes in massive bundles once or twice a day when the stream of people is constant.

Why has Germany closed it's borders to migrants? People are still dying right?

Think we are going to have to feel sorry for Hungary again soon. 

Don't worry, Nicola Sturgeon last week pledged one million pounds and to take 1000.   That was after David Cameron's response drove her to tears.

David Milliband on the TV this morning saying the UK response to the crisis on the ground has been exemplary, but days we should be taking 25000 over next year/year and a half. 

He is the new labour leader, right?  Seems to understand stuff and everything.

Corbyn seems to have taken over the newspaper headlines, but the suffering & misery goes on for the refugees.


(http://s1.legalinsurrection.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/hungary-serbia-romania-map-guardian-e1442353611209.png)


(http://s4.legalinsurrection.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/Vice-News-European-Refugee-Crisis-620x4372-620x437.jpg)


(http://static.dnaindia.com/sites/default/files/2015/09/05/372930-austria-refugees-afp.jpg)


(http://cdn.images.express.co.uk/img/dynamic/78/590x/Denmark-604190.jpg)


(http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/03440/refugee19_3440612b.jpg)


(http://america.aljazeera.com/content/ajam/multimedia/photo-gallery/2015/8/photos-refugees-negotiate-barbed-wire-at-hungarian-border/_jcr_content/slideShowImages/slide5/image.adapt.960.high.hungary_border_refugees_05a.jpg)



(http://d.ibtimes.co.uk/en/full/1455626/migrants-hungary-eu-fence.jpg)


(http://www.dw.com/image/0,,18716834_303,00.jpg)


(http://static01.nyt.com/images/2015/09/14/world/14MIGRANTS5/14MIGRANTS-master675.jpg)

(http://www.channelnewsasia.com/image/2124346/1442170566000/large16x9/768/432/syrian-and-afghan.jpg)

The way of the internet age Tikay.

Crisis happens.  People jump up and down on the internet and demand something must be done.  People sign online petitions.  People even defriend people on facebook. 

Next week.  Next topic.

Exactly that, & I'm as guilty as anyone. I just suddenly realised that it had dropped off the front pages & tv headlines, & Mr Corbyn is now the hot topic.

Strange times.

Some of those scenes in Hungary & Germany are heartbreaking. When they have children in their arms, it really makes you think.

In the thread about the BA flight that caught fire in Vegas, two blondes (both with children), commented that if they were trying to exit the 'plane & some bugger got in their way faffing about with hand luggage, they might just deck the bloke. It does not bear thinking about how these Syrian refugees with children must feel. God forbid.

(All badly explained, but you'll get the drift).   

Yeah - I don't think it's fallen off the radar as badly as some topics in the printed press.  The paper today had a double page spread on Corbyn's first PMQs but then 4 pages of updataes on the refugee crisis straight behind it.

I just find on the internet - not so much forums, but twitter/facebook type platforms the hot topic of the day will change weekly and old subjects get forgotten very quickly.  It all seems empty ranting to me.

One day we, (and by we I mean our representatives and heads of state) will say, 'My God, how did we let it happen?'

To quote your own linked article:

'He only wanted to go to Europe for the sake of his children,' said Suleiman Kurdi, an uncle of the grieving father. 'Now that they're dead, he wants to stay here in Kobane next to them.'