Immigration

  • Thread starter KSaiyu
  • 1,702 comments
  • 69,734 views
Are you high on something?
This is his schtick. Things were better back in the good old days and traditional family values presented with a coat of whimsical paint. The whole alpha male thing is pretty new though.
 
This is his schtick. Things were better back in the good old days and traditional family values presented with a coat of whimsical paint. The whole alpha male thing is pretty new though.
I've been working on my swordsmanship and chivalry for the past few years. :cool:
 
All i know is that it's easier hammering on this kind of stuff (or grammar mistakes for that matter), than to reply with a decent counter argument yourself.
So, you can expect us to "reply with a decent counter argument", but we can't expect you to create a decent argument in the first place?

I will definitely start using IMO, or 'I think' a lot more from now on so we don't have to bother going this route.
That won't exempt you from providing sources. Opinions do not form in a vacuum - there needs to have been something that you have read, witnessed or experienced that was crucial in formulating your opinion. We will just question that the way we question your sources.
 
Sweden will deport 80.000 immigrants whose asylum has been rejected this year. In 2015 alone 163.000 came to Sweden, and now a third of the applications have been processed, half of them are rejected.

Discussions are heating up after a 15 year old immigrant stabbed a 22 year old employee to death in a refugee center.
 
Sweden will deport 80.000 immigrants whose asylum has been rejected this year. In 2015 alone 163.000 came to Sweden, and now a third of the applications have been processed, half of them are rejected.

Discussions are heating up after a 15 year old immigrant stabbed a 22 year old employee to death in a refugee center.

There were 26.000 rejected applications last year if you count all applications that were decided but not granted (i.e. rejections, Dublin and other). The total number of decisions were 58.000 for the entire year and the average handling time for these decisions was 229 days. Based on those figures it will take a couple of years to handle all those 163.000 applications, so it's not true that 80.000 were rejected.

The 80.000 figure is a quote from a minister who says that over the following years, up to 80.000 asylum seekers may have their applications rejected. Which is probably based on the normal proportion of granted applications, which is just above 50%. But it all depends on from where these 163.000 applicants are. For asylum seekers from Syria, 90% of all applications were granted last year, from Eritra 88%. But from Afghanistan only 35% were granted and from Iraq only 20%. From Albania it was no more than 1%. If the influx in applications are mainly from Syria, then far fewer than 80.000 will have their applications rejected, but if they're mainly from Afghanistan then it could easily end up being more than 80.000 rejected applications.

Most of the decisions are for applications that came before the big influx at the end of the year, so it's not at all certain that the proportions at the end of the year were the same as they were earlier that year.
 
What matter Macedonia is closed? There's another all-EU land route through Bulgaria, Romania and Hungary, no?

If I recall correctly, Hungary has also closed their borders.

Macedonia is not an EU State so isn't obligated to have open borders with its neighbours. Hungary has closed its border with Serbia, which is a non-EU country and therefore consequently there is also no obligation for an open border. I believe its other borders are as semi-open* as they typically are.

I'm not saying they were the right decisions but they are understandable decisions.

*Hungary is one of those "nobody likes us" semi-isolated type governments
 
So, you can expect us to "reply with a decent counter argument", but we can't expect you to create a decent argument in the first place?
All you did was hammer on the one statement i couldn't possibly provide a source for, and which i altered so it can be viewed as an opinion now. For the rest you conveniently evaded giving any decent reply.

That won't exempt you from providing sources. Opinions do not form in a vacuum - there needs to have been something that you have read, witnessed or experienced that was crucial in formulating your opinion. We will just question that the way we question your sources.
Yeah but you know as well as i do that any sources will be easy to laugh away if that's your agenda when it concerns the 'Trojan horse' theory, and the islamization of Europe. The video of the Imam i posted pretty much confirmed that theory but you can just counter it again with 'that's just one Imam'...
 
All you did was hammer on the one statement i couldn't possibly provide a source for, and which i altered so it can be viewed as an opinion now. For the rest you conveniently evaded giving any decent reply.


Yeah but you know as well as i do that any sources will be easy to laugh away if that's your agenda when it concerns the 'Trojan horse' theory, and the islamization of Europe. The video of the Imam i posted pretty much confirmed that theory but you can just counter it again with 'that's just one Imam'...
Ever actually talk to an Imam just once?
 
Last edited:
Ever actually talk to an Imam just once?
If I would I'd pick one that preaches hate and islamization of the west by force, as those are the ones inspiring this terrorizing behavior. Speaking to a normal imam would be a tad useless as they aren't the ones influencing the radicals, although I'm sure it might be inspiring in some way or the other.
 
If I would I'd pick one that preaches hate and islamization of the west by force, as those are the ones inspiring this terrorizing behavior.

LiveLeak video or it didn't happen. Of course, you could pick a similar proponent of any idea, plenty of white Christians who'll do just as well.

Fortunately the Imams you speak of aren't

a normal imam would be a tad useless as they aren't the ones influencing the radicals.
 
If I would I'd pick one that preaches hate and islamization of the west by force, as those are the ones inspiring this terrorizing behavior. Speaking to a normal imam would be a tad useless as they aren't the ones influencing the radicals, although I'm sure it might be inspiring in some way or the other.
Thats good if you want to go in depth on Radical Islam. Not so if you want to judge Islam as a whole.

I could pick a Westboro precher if i want to.
 
:lol:

Oh Sweden. You are turning into the Florida Man of Europe.

I do sense some right winged bias in the sniper article though. But just a tad.
 
Last edited:
Thats good if you want to go in depth on Radical Islam. Not so if you want to judge Islam as a whole.
Well yes, as that's more relevant with regards to ISIS who created this refugee crisis in the first place, and the ones among the stream of migrants that are sympathetic to their ideas about Islam, which poses a threat to our western societies as a whole.
 
Well yes, as that's more relevant with regards to ISIS who created this refugee crisis in the first place, and the ones among the stream of migrants that are sympathetic to their ideas about Islam, which poses a threat to our western societies as a whole.

I would rather have Saddam Hussein, Muammar Gaddafi, and Bashar al-Assad in power instead of ISIS, however the west has other plans. I wonder sometimes if our leaders have our best interest in mind, they surely don't have the world's best interests in mind.
 

Not so. The source story says that they've been returned to Poland under the terms of their Shengen visas. The recycled article you posted suggests it has more to do with skin colour than the return of refugees to the first-state, simply not so.


Which is a problem... why? It seems that Sweden are damned if they do and damned if they don't. What's wrong with integrating into a country's way of life? Are all refugees terrorists? All terrorists are terrorists, I'll give you that. They're unlikely to train at Swedish hunting schools though, by percentage.


Which is about radicalisation of the vulnerable and about local conscription. Both tactics that ISIS use.

Do you actually read any sources yourself or are you more a one-pass-headline person?
 
Where do you suggest they be forcibly removed to?

If their asylum application is turned down, usually it means that where they came from is safe enough to return to.

The Dutch government has a weird way of dealing with those cases. Rarely they are sent back, but they just kick them into illegal status, left on their own on the streets without being ablr to claim anything.
 
Not so. The source story says that they've been returned to Poland under the terms of their Shengen visas. The recycled article you posted suggests it has more to do with skin colour than the return of refugees to the first-state, simply not so.

Which doesn't change the outcome and obvious double standard in Germany when it comes to the laws and EU treaties.

Which is a problem... why? It seems that Sweden are damned if they do and damned if they don't. What's wrong with integrating into a country's way of life? Are all refugees terrorists? All terrorists are terrorists, I'll give you that. They're unlikely to train at Swedish hunting schools though, by percentage.

virus warning, don't go on his link

I found this funny, you don't have any statistics or polls which shows that muslim immigrants with certain cultural background (and no FrzGT, I don't mean Indonesian culture) are not a problem in the long run. Where do you get this feeling that everything will be ok and Europe will pursue secularism, science, knowledge, individual freedoms and will not turn in religious and cultural cesspool. I would say your feeling comes from your left nut :lol: (sorry if offensive).


Which is about radicalisation of the vulnerable and about local conscription. Both tactics that ISIS use.

... if someone is stupid and do stupid things it doesn't make him victim. Not sure if you just trolling.

Do you actually read any sources yourself or are you more a one-pass-headline person?

Yes, if I'm really interested in the story ...




... as I recall, one of the complaints against them in Europe is that they form insular communities and don't choose to be part of the bigger community. (which, funnily enough, doesn't want to be part of the Muslim community, either)


see, Europeans think about themselves as individuals which form communities if there is something in common. And what have Europeans in common with muslims, their customs are quite alien to common European. But they keep comming here and then they are surprised that almost nobody wants to talk with them, apart from school, business, etc.
 
Which doesn't change the outcome and obvious double standard in Germany when it comes to the laws and EU treaties.

So you need a different source, is that what you're saying? "Obvious" to you, maybe?

virus warning, don't go on his link

I found this funny, you don't have any statistics or polls which shows that muslim immigrants with certain cultural background (and no FrzGT, I don't mean Indonesian culture) are not a problem in the long run.

I double-checked the link, no warnings here.

Do you have polls to show that "muslim immigrants with certain cultural background" are a problem in the long run? The onus for sourcing is upon you, not me. You'd also have to show that the same was/wasn't true of any other "type" of person.

Where do you get this feeling that everything will be ok and Europe will pursue secularism, science, knowledge, individual freedoms and will not turn in religious and cultural cesspool. I would say your feeling comes from your left nut :lol: (sorry if offensive).

More childish, I'd say. What makes you think I have that feeling? What makes you think that bad muslims are any more/less of a problem than bad christians or bad atheists? What makes you think that cultural problems don't occur regardless of muslim immigration? You could look at Eire for some interesting history.

... if someone is stupid and do stupid things it doesn't make him victim. Not sure if you just trolling.

It can indeed make her a victim, I guess we'll have to disagree.

Europeans think about themselves as individuals which form communities if there is something in common.

Well, I should thank you for telling me what I think... but you're wrong. Maybe generalising isn't the best way to continue?

And what have Europeans in common with muslims, their customs are quite alien to common European. But they keep comming here and then they are surprised that almost nobody wants to talk with them, apart from school, business, etc.

What a crock of bollocks, I think. What about muslims who are several generations into being European, for a simple starter? Are you sure nobody wants to talk to them? Maybe it's just you who doesn't want to talk to them. Probably their loss.
 
This makes me so 🤬 mad: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...light-growing-scandal-amid-asylum-crisis.html

1. The "14-year-old" was 15 and a half years old when that picture was taken. He held the record for 14-year-olds, but he set it in 2010 while the picture is from 2012.

2. The "16-year-old" was 18 years old when that picture was taken. Nowhere in the article is it claimed that he is 16. In fact, it's printed black on white that he was 18 years old and even that he lived at a home for young men over 18. He left Afghanistan when he was 16, that's all.

3. I don't know how old Youssaf is, but I don't think that picture is any evidence of his age. It certainly doesn't make 15 seem implausible. And neither does the alleged height of 180-ish centimeters (6 feet, according to the Daily 🤬 Mail):

male_height_chart.jpg


4. "The extraordinary pictures of the two Afghans, Ahmad and Saad, were published in the Swedish press, with Government approval, to show how enthusiastically this politically correct nation welcomes in orphaned young migrants."

WTF?! Alright, let's get this straight:
  1. How on Earth can this woman, miss Sue Reid, know the purpose behind articles that she haven't even bothered to read?
  2. The Swedish government has no say what so ever in what Swedish press publishes. Her perception of reality must be disturbed at a fundamental level if she thinks that the press sends articles to the government for approval.
  3. The way the sentence is worded is not even near an objective, unbiased description of the articles or the events surrounding them. It's propaganda.
5. There is no such thing as "Swedish human rights rules". The laws concerning asylum seekers are generally found in the Aliens Act: https://www.riksdagen.se/sv/Dokumen...gssamling/Utlanningslag-2005716_sfs-2005-716/

6. It's not easy to be accepted as a minor. There are no mandatory age checks, but that does not mean that your claimed age is taken for granted. If the Swedish Migration Agency finds reason to doubt your stated age they will do so, with or without medical evidence. As a minor you're encouraged to perform a voluntary age check, to get support for your claimed age.

7. Child migrants are not fast-tracked and does not get any additional benefits. The major difference is on what level you are placed within the system. Adults are cared for on a state level, by the Migration Agency, while minors are cared for on municipal level. Minors are assigned a trustee that will take care of their interests and economy until they're 18 or until they can be reunited with their parents. The average handling time in 2015 was 229 days for the entire group of asylum seekers, and 195 days for unaccompanied minors. 55% of all applications were granted, while 66% of all applications for unaccompanied minors were granted.

8. The "growing scandal" is not a growing scandal. The Daily Mail brings up old rumours from 2011 and 2012 (which were busted in points 1 and 2 above) to try and paint a picture of a currently ongoing scandal.

9. "One social commentator named Merit Wager — an author and columnist on one of Sweden’s daily newspapers — claimed on her online blog in November that administrators at the immigration service had been ordered to ‘accept the claim that an applicant is a child if he does not look as if he is over 40’."

It's true that she wrote it, but what she wrote isn't true. The claimed age is listed as a claimed age unless it's obviously wrong, but the Agency does not accept the claimed age as the applicants true age by default.

10. "And in a leaked interview to a respected Right-leaning Scandinavian newspaper, Dispatch International..."

Again, WTF?!! It's like claiming that Goebbels was a respected Right-leaning German politician. Seriously, here are some direct quotes from what they've published:

"den massiva invandringen av lågintelligenta från syd till nord förklarar varför Europa och USA blir dummare för varje dag" (Helmuth Nyborg,Dispatch International 29 september 2012)

"The massive immigration of low intelligent from the south to the north explains why Europe and the USA becomes dumber for every day." (Helmuth Nyborg, 2012-09-29)

"Genom den massiva invandringen av människor med betydligt lägre IQ rasar våra länder i rask takt ner mot den gräns där demokratin inte längre går att upprätthålla"(Helmuth Nyborg, Dispatch International 29 september 2012)

"By the massive immigration of people with far lower IQ our countries are quickly falling towards the limit where democracy can no longer be sustained" (ibid)

"mångkulturen är både farlig och ondskefull. Om den inte stoppas snart är den fullt kapabel att förgöra Västvärldens befolkningar." (Paul Weston, Dispatch International #1 2012)

"Multiculturalism is both dangerous and evil. If it's not being stopped soon it will be fully capable of destroying the people of the western world." (Paul Weston, #1 2012)

11. "The crisis has escalated because migrants arriving in Europe throw away their identity papers so they can avoid EU rules which say that if their asylum claim fails they must be returned to the country where they first registered in the EU."

What EU rule would that be? If an asylum "claim" (application) fails they're not sent to the country where they first registered, they're sent to their home country. Throwing away identity papers would be the most stupid thing you could do, as you get rid of the only document that canprove that you are who you claim to be. And since the beginning of January, proper identification is required if you want to travel from Denmark to Sweden (which is the route almost all of the refugees to Sweden are taking).

The Dublin regulation says that an asylum applicant should get his or her application handled by the country where they first arrive. That system is handled by taking fingerprints, not by checking identification papers.

12. "This leaves the politically correct Swedes having to accept the word of ‘child migrants’, because they cannot prove their age claims one way or the other."

It's the other way around. If the applicant can't provide evidence of his/her age, they must accept the decision by the Agency.

13. "On his Facebook page, he boasts of his sporting triumphs and gives his birth date as June 1996 — meaning that he is now, apparently, 19 and would have been around 14 when that picture was taken.

But in overwhelmed Sweden, there is no way of proving, one way or the other, if he is telling the truth."

She can't even handle basic addition. If you're born in June 1996, how old are you then in February 2012? Maybe it's true after all that Europe is becoming dumber... The incompetence of the Daily Mail is certainly evidence enough for that.
 
A live hand grenade was thrown at a refugee centre in the south-west German town of Villingen-Schwenningen, close to the Swiss border. The pin was pulled but thankfully the explosives failed to detonate. In the same article, it's mentioned that attacks on refugee centres in Germany have shot up from 199 in 2014 to 1,005 in 2015, with the far-right believed to be behind the vast majority of the attacks.
 
Back