Migration Megathread

Sand · 19-07-2019 9:27pm

Brian? wrote: »

The NGOs coordinate with the people traffickers? That's terrible, have you some proof of it?

Well, its not a court of law and we both know your views are not based on evidence. But sure, review the Frontex report for some evidence.

Important changes were observed on this migratory route in 2016. During 2015, and the first months of 2016, smuggling groups instructed migrants to make satellite phone calls to the Maritime Rescue Coordination Centre (MRCC) in Rome to initiate targeted rescues on the high seas. SAR operations were mainly undertaken by Italian law enforcement, EUNAVFOR Med or Frontex vessels with NGO vessels involved in less than 5% of the incidents. As shown in Figure 5, more than half of all rescue operations were initiated in this manner. From June until October 2016, however, the pattern was reversed. Satellite phone calls to MRCC Rome decreased sharply to 10% and NGO rescue operations rose significantly to more than 40% of all incidents. Since June 2016, a significant number of boats were intercepted or rescued by NGO vessels without any prior distress call and without official information as to the rescue location. NGO presence and activities close to, and occasionally within, the 12-mile Libyan territorial waters nearly doubled compared with the previous year, totalling 15 NGO assets (14 maritime and 1 aerial). In parallel, the overall number of incidents increased dramatically.

A significant and inexplicable change in NGO and trafficker behaviour, an unerring ability by NGO vessels to home in on trafficker vessels with no previous distress call. And not only that, but closer co-ordination leads to more trafficking, and therefore more deaths.

But again - I don't expect this to affect your view at all. Even if they do co-operate with people traffickers, it is in service to a greater cause. That is your view. Right?

Brian? · 19-07-2019 9:49pm

Sand wrote: »

Well, its not a court of law and we both know your views are not based on evidence. But sure, review the Frontex report for some evidence.

That's a 64 page document, can you give some hints where the evidence is or do I need to read the whole thing?

A significant and inexplicable change in NGO and trafficker behaviour, an unerring ability by NGO vessels to home in on trafficker vessels with no previous distress call. And not only that, but closer co-ordination leads to more trafficking, and therefore more deaths.

But again - I don't expect this to affect your view at all. Even if they do co-operate with people traffickers, it is in service to a greater cause. That is your view. Right?

That's quite the strawman you have there. That is not my view. If the NGOs are coordinating with human traffickers, they are breaking the law and should be punished.

For the one millionth time, I am not in favour of unfettered migration. I do not believe in open borders. I am in favour of saving people from drowning though. I think if they are genuine refugees they should be given asylum, if not they should be deported whence they came. This is not the first time I have expressed this opinion, so stop making up opinions I've never expressed.

Limpy · 19-07-2019 10:00pm

The west broke there home (Muslim and some Christians ) in Libya, Syria, Iraq ect. They should factor in this when they decide to bomb the next county. (or arm rebels)

If you break it you own it.

RandomName2 · 19-07-2019 11:03pm

Brian? wrote: »

The NGOs coordinate with the people traffickers? That's terrible, have you some proof of it?

The NGOs, in the absence of any other vessels, are an essential part of the trafficking organization across the Mediterranean. Traffickers leave their passengers a bit out to sea, with the understanding that NGOs will pick up them up.

If NGOs were interested in both halting trafficking and saving the trafficked, they would return them to the point of origin, but the NGOs are interested in facilitating the trafficking, and will therefore force them on an EU country, as that's where the trafficked individuals want to go. If NGOs did not do this there would be no way for the trafficked individuals to make it into Europe. Well they could apply for visas etc. and spend the money that they gave to the traffickers instead on plane tickets, but they probably aren't eligible for visas, hence the trafficking.

The NGOs actively encourage trafficking by facilitating it. This has proven correlation with increased drownings, but the NGOs clearly don't have this as a primary concern.

In 2017 some European countries, like Italy, got serious about stopping the trafficking, and as such the number of migrant deaths plummeted. NGOs are desperately trying to undo this.

Limpy wrote: »

The west broke there home (Muslim and some Christians ) in Libya, Syria, Iraq ect. They should factor in this when they decide to bomb the next county. (or arm rebels)

If you break it you own it.

The migrants across the Mediterranean leaving from Libya are not from Syria or Iraq. Libyans in general aren't attempting to enter the EU by these means either (though there would be good grounds to allow them to do so if they were, for the exact reason you outlined).

Brian? wrote: »

That's a 64 page document, can you give some hints where the evidence is or do I need to read the whole thing?

You could just highlight part of his quote and just search the document. Took me 3 seconds.

Irish Praetorian · 20-07-2019 9:36am

Limpy wrote: »

The west broke there home (Muslim and some Christians ) in Libya, Syria, Iraq ect. They should factor in this when they decide to bomb the next county. (or arm rebels)

If you break it you own it.

An intriguing assessment, I can only presume that following this principle, those countries like our own which had no part in such campaigns don't need to concern ourselves these refugee crises?

Furthermore, can we assume that refugees from countries like Eritrea that managed to precipitate their own crises, should likewise be ignored?

Limpy · 20-07-2019 12:29pm

Irish Praetorian wrote: »

An intriguing assessment, I can only presume that following this principle, those countries like our own which had no part in such campaigns don't need to concern ourselves these refugee crises?

Furthermore, can we assume that refugees from countries like Eritrea that managed to precipitate their own crises, should likewise be ignored?

We provide airports and refueling points for troops who were fighting in these countries. Our government did not object politically to said wars. So we are part of it.

Irish Praetorian · 21-07-2019 9:48pm

Limpy wrote: »

We provide airports and refueling points for troops who were fighting in these countries. Our government did not object politically to said wars. So we are part of it.

I'll respond to this but what about my Eritrea point?

weisses · 21-07-2019 9:58pm

Irish Praetorian wrote: »

I'll respond to this but what about my Eritrea point?

Unfortunately we in the west were also involved in Eritrea ..

Irish Praetorian · 22-07-2019 7:35pm

weisses wrote: »

Unfortunately we in the west were also involved in Eritrea ..

Well that being the case (and to answer both posters), where on earth are we not "involved" in?

Genuine question here for those who want to speak about the plasticity of Irish/European/Western culpability for evil in the world; which states would you identify as not being subject to our collective 'responsibility'?

And how do these rate versus those states and peoples to whom we apparently do have a 'responsibility - does a political refugee from a country we are responsible for outrank an economic migrant from one we are responsible for?

Limpy · 22-07-2019 10:19pm

Irish Praetorian wrote: »

Well that being the case (and to answer both posters), where on earth are we not "involved" in?

Genuine question here for those who want to speak about the plasticity of Irish/European/Western culpability for evil in the world; which states would you identify as not being subject to our collective 'responsibility'?

And how do these rate versus those states and peoples to whom we apparently do have a 'responsibility - does a political refugee from a country we are responsible for outrank an economic migrant from one we are responsible for?

Sadly its the west (and allies) vs the rest. If your the rest then we will chip away with sanctions, and or give support to opposition figures. Untill your on our side (vassel state/puppet government). If your located with the rest and you are pro west then you will get political refuge easily, as you will be useful.

The UK and US gave plenty of political refuge to anti gadhaffi figures before any regime change happened. Now the refuges leaving there because of the West involvement deserve the same help.

Irish Praetorian · 22-07-2019 10:28pm

Limpy wrote: »

Sadly its the west (and allies) vs the rest. If your the rest then we will chip away with sanctions, and or give support to opposition figures. Untill your on our side (vassel state/puppet government). If your located with the rest and you are pro west then you will get political refuge easily, as you will be useful.

The UK and US gave plenty of political refuge to anti gadhaffi figures before any regime change happened. Now the refuges leaving there because of the West involvement deserve the same help.

I'm reminded of a very pro-Russian poster from another board who argues with firm conviction that Russia is one of the only free countries in the world, and that the only other free countries are those with side with Russia and those that side against Russia must clearly be US puppets or vassals. I tend to eschew this kind of thinking and urge people to avoid getting caught up in the idea that the Western world is nothing more than US puppet states - our societies are imperfect, but even still remain broadly superior to just about every other one on the planet, its one of the reasons why so many people try to come here.

Now I suspect the issue at the moment with Libya, isn't actually refugees from Libya, but rather its situation as a transit point for migrants from sub-Saharan Africa. Again I think the initial question remains of how we delineate the various groups in need.

Limpy · 22-07-2019 10:36pm

Irish Praetorian wrote: »

I'm reminded of a very pro-Russian poster from another board who argues with firm conviction that Russia is one of the only free countries in the world, and that the only other free countries are those with side with Russia and those that side against Russia must clearly be US puppets or vassals. I tend to eschew this kind of thinking and urge people to avoid getting caught up in the idea that the Western world is nothing more than US puppet states - our societies are imperfect, but even still remain broadly superior to just about every other one on the planet, its one of the reasons why so many people try to come here.

Now I suspect the issue at the moment with Libya, isn't actually refugees from Libya, but rather its situation as a transit point for migrants from sub-Saharan Africa. Again I think the initial question remains of how we delineate the various groups in need.

I'm not saying the rest are great. I'm just saying most of the major wars in my lifetime were started by the west.

Irish Praetorian · 22-07-2019 10:49pm

Limpy wrote: »

I'm not saying the rest are great. I'm just saying most of the major wars in my lifetime were started by the west.

I might not disagree with that but I would certainly zero in on the big offender (the US) rather than say lumping together Belgium with Britain for example.

ancapailldorcha · 23-07-2019 8:18am

Don't dump tweets here please. Posts deleted.

creeper1 · 23-07-2019 11:31am

I’m reading that Ireland has agreed to take migrants as part of a Europe wide redistribution program. I wonder if anyone can estimate the number of Africans that will come here.

https://www.rte.ie/news/2019/0723/1064652-migrants/

I’d personally be in favour of Ireland taking the European fine than the migrants.

Limpy · 23-07-2019 4:36pm

creeper1 wrote: »

I’m reading that Ireland has agreed to take migrants as part of a Europe wide redistribution program. I wonder if anyone can estimate the number of Africans that will come here.

https://www.rte.ie/news/2019/0723/1064652-migrants/

I’d personally be in favour of Ireland taking the European fine than the migrants.

Look at all the heat Orban got for refusing to take migrants. There's no way leo and Charlie et al will be going against the EU.

Experience_day · 28-07-2019 1:23pm

How is Ireland meant to retain any cultural heritage? Speaking as an immigrant hypocrite

, it just strikes me that Ireland is a very small country and surely large numbers of immigration would have profoundly more impact than other places like France/Germany who can absorb it better.

splashuum · 01-08-2019 7:05pm

Two very sad events happened in Germany this week.

1. A man was hacked to death today by a Syrian migrant.

2. African man thew a child and two others under a high speed tram.

Would these events have happened if tighter migration laws were put in place ?

Are people still claiming that all cultures have the same morals? If so, they may need there heads checked.

Chips Lovell · 02-08-2019 9:00am

It's a illogical to expect immigrants to be uniquely virtuous. They are ordinary people, just like the rest of us. It's inevitable that a certain proportion will commit crimes or become seriously mentally ill. You can't predict which of them will do that in advance any more than you can with the general population.

weisses · 02-08-2019 10:55am

splashuum wrote: »

Two very sad events happened in Germany this week.

1. A man was hacked to death today by a Syrian migrant.

2. African man thew a child and two others under a high speed tram.

Would these events have happened if tighter migration laws were put in place ?

Are people still claiming that all cultures have the same morals? If so, they may need there heads checked.

What culture was responsible for what happened to Anna Kriegel ?

People in every culture are capable of hideous things ...

4068ac1elhodqr · 02-08-2019 1:20pm

Chips Lovell wrote: »

It's a illogical to expect immigrants to be uniquely virtuous. They are ordinary people, just like the rest of us. It's inevitable that a certain proportion will commit crimes or become seriously mentally ill. You can't predict which of them will do that in advance any more than you can with the general population.

Indeed all you can do is look at prison populations and crime stats or trends across the eu or our close neighbours in the uk.

Oh. wait. No, best not do that.

Then there is the factor relating to illegal migrants trafficked into europe, often to work for crime gangs and thus engage in illegal activity. Nevermind the zero tax-take (by default) from operating in a cash-only black employment market.

Chips Lovell · 02-08-2019 1:28pm

Briggs Full Sunblock wrote: »

Indeed all you can do is look at prison populations and crime stats or trends across the eu or our close neighbours in the uk.

If it were normalised by socio-economic status, it may be interesting.

4068ac1elhodqr · 02-08-2019 2:35pm

Chips Lovell wrote: »

If it were normalised by socio-economic status, it may be interesting.

'If' is fantasy. The question you want to ask is 'how likely'.
Or even better and more progressive and positve is: 'how can..'

The only way these two very different groups (with similar issues) can escape their likely poverty is a mix of:

i) Full integration, or conformity into the general population.

ii) Rights for their women to live fully independent and free lifestlyes including a university education, travel and open, free association, with others.
As you know in Ireland it's becoming very rare for a single breadwinner to even purchase a house and/or escape poverty unless they're very lucky.

Sand · 02-08-2019 11:41pm

Brian? wrote: »

That's quite the strawman you have there. That is not my view. If the NGOs are coordinating with human traffickers, they are breaking the law and should be punished.

But you do acknowledge that it is widely accepted that the NGO 'rescues' are really pickups of migrants, coordinated with criminal organisations, right? You were dismissive of my earlier assertion so I think to progress the discussion its important that you accept the presented evidence. If your view does not adjust to the evidence, what is the point of asking me for it?

For the one millionth time, I am not in favour of unfettered migration. I do not believe in open borders. I am in favour of saving people from drowning though. I think if they are genuine refugees they should be given asylum, if not they should be deported whence they came. This is not the first time I have expressed this opinion, so stop making up opinions I've never expressed.

If not, they should never be permitted to cross the border in the first place. You seem to propose there is some effective system whereby people cross the border, present their case to a fully functioning adjudication and those who fail objective tests are quickly and effectively deported with no real cost to Europeans in general.

That simply is not true. The reality is that hundreds of thousands, if not millions of overwhelmingly fighting age males roam across Europe's external and internal borders with little or no documentation and little or no control or tracking. Every now and then a woman or child is raped, or pushed under a train or a European has to dodge a stabbing attempt while carrying out their shopping. This is even without the organised criminality or second generation terrorism. This is the new normal. You claim you're not in favour of open borders but you're steadily opposed to any enforcement of Europe's borders. Otherwise, what are we disagreeing on? I've no objection to rescuing drowning people. Rescue them back to Libya. Criminalise attempts to transport them to Europe. If your priority is saving lives, you must agree, right?

splashuum wrote: »

Two very sad events happened in Germany this week.

1. A man was hacked to death today by a Syrian migrant.

2. African man thew a child and two others under a high speed tram.

Would these events have happened if tighter migration laws were put in place ?

Are people still claiming that all cultures have the same morals? If so, they may need there heads checked.

In the second case, I note that the Guardian negatively reported that 'far-right' German political parties were 'exploiting' the death of that 8 year old for political ends. How low of them, unlike the high minded and noble activists who plastered international media (including the Guardian) with the dead bodies of children likes Alan Kurdi and Valeria Martinez for political ends.

The hypocrisy struck me. Was someone to plaster pictures of the body of the 8 year German boy or the 11 year old Ebba Akerlund in international media, it would be (rightly in my view) assailed as horrific cynicism. But for open border advocates, pictures of dead children are fair game.

The reality is that Alan Kurdi, Valeria Martinez, Ebba Akerlund and this German boy are all victims of mass migration. Their deaths are entirely predictable outcomes of mass migration and without mass migration they would all be alive today. If mass migration is permitted to continue, more children will needlessly die. For those who think mass migration is something to managed better, but not halted, the deaths of further children is simply accepted as the cost of doing business. Drawing attention to that is not exploitation - its the only moral stance left.

The reality remains - mass migration is not in the interests of Europeans, and Europeans have a legitimate right to expect that their governments will make policy in their interests - not those of other people.

creeper1 · 03-08-2019 3:58am

Chips Lovell wrote: »

It's a illogical to expect immigrants to be uniquely virtuous. They are ordinary people, just like the rest of us. It's inevitable that a certain proportion will commit crimes or become seriously mentally ill. You can't predict which of them will do that in advance any more than you can with the general population.

I’m going to put this simply- Nigerians, Bangladeshis, Pakistanis and others should not be in Ireland.

Nor should they be in Europe. Stop making out we owe them something. We owe them nothing. Just as they owe us nothing.

So when these migrants commit crimes it is all the more galling because they absolutely should not be here

Brian? · 03-08-2019 9:13am

Sand wrote: »

But you do acknowledge that it is widely accepted that the NGO 'rescues' are really pickups of migrants, coordinated with criminal organisations, right? You were dismissive of my earlier assertion so I think to progress the discussion its important that you accept the presented evidence. If your view does not adjust to the evidence, what is the point of asking me for it?

You know what, I find your “hit and run” style of debating extremely tiring:

1. You “presented evidence” a couple of weeks ago I now have to go and review before I can properly respond.

2. You don’t actually acknowledge a single point I made. Just restate your previous position.

If not, they should never be permitted to cross the border in the first place. You seem to propose there is some effective system whereby people cross the border, present their case to a fully functioning adjudication and those who fail objective tests are quickly and effectively deported with no real cost to Europeans in general.

That simply is not true. The reality is that hundreds of thousands, if not millions of overwhelmingly fighting age males roam across Europe's external and internal borders with little or no documentation and little or no control or tracking. Every now and then a woman or child is raped, or pushed under a train or a European has to dodge a stabbing attempt while carrying out their shopping. This is even without the organised criminality or second generation terrorism. This is the new normal. You claim you're not in favour of open borders but you're steadily opposed to any enforcement of Europe's borders. Otherwise, what are we disagreeing on? I've no objection to rescuing drowning people. Rescue them back to Libya. Criminalise attempts to transport them to Europe. If your priority is saving lives, you must agree, right?

In the second case, I note that the Guardian negatively reported that 'far-right' German political parties were 'exploiting' the death of that 8 year old for political ends. How low of them, unlike the high minded and noble activists who plastered international media (including the Guardian) with the dead bodies of children likes Alan Kurdi and Valeria Martinez for political ends.

The hypocrisy struck me. Was someone to plaster pictures of the body of the 8 year German boy or the 11 year old Ebba Akerlund in international media, it would be (rightly in my view) assailed as horrific cynicism. But for open border advocates, pictures of dead children are fair game.

The reality is that Alan Kurdi, Valeria Martinez, Ebba Akerlund and this German boy are all victims of mass migration. Their deaths are entirely predictable outcomes of mass migration and without mass migration they would all be alive today. If mass migration is permitted to continue, more children will needlessly die. For those who think mass migration is something to managed better, but not halted, the deaths of further children is simply accepted as the cost of doing business. Drawing attention to that is not exploitation - its the only moral stance left.

The reality remains - mass migration is not in the interests of Europeans, and Europeans have a legitimate right to expect that their governments will make policy in their interests - not those of other people.

This wall of words amounts to: refugees shouldn’t be allowed to seek refuge. They should do it from home and be processed before they leave the country they’re attempting to flee.

Are you willing to accept the consequences of this, like genocide and people being herded into camps? You probably are, as long as they stay away from Europe.

Midlife · 03-08-2019 10:50am

creeper1 wrote: »

I’m going to put this simply- Nigerians, Bangladeshis, Pakistanis and others should not be in Ireland.

Nor should they be in Europe. Stop making out we owe them something. We owe them nothing. Just as they owe us nothing.

So when these migrants commit crimes it is all the more galling because they absolutely should not be here

Are you basing this on colour/religion/ethnicity or what?

Should Chinese, Brazilians and Indians be allowed in Ireland/Europe?

creeper1 · 03-08-2019 11:31am

I get what you are saying above. Actually I think a lot of the Chinese in Europe are students or tourists and are economic benefit but in the name of fairness if they arrive illegally they should be deported too.

Perhaps a better and fairer rule would be all foreigners of every description are deported if they arrived illegally.

Hope that the above is politically correct enough now.

weisses · 03-08-2019 12:29pm

creeper1 wrote: »

I get what you are saying above. Actually I think a lot of the Chinese in Europe are students or tourists and are economic benefit but in the name of fairness if they arrive illegally they should be deported too.

Perhaps a better and fairer rule would be all foreigners of every description are deported if they arrived illegally.

Hope that the above is politically correct enough now.

That is not politically correct ... Its just correct

Better than your other post stating non whites should not be in Ireland ... which is racist

Brian? · 03-08-2019 1:35pm

creeper1 wrote: »

I’m going to put this simply- Nigerians, Bangladeshis, Pakistanis and others should not be in Ireland.

Nor should they be in Europe. Stop making out we owe them something. We owe them nothing. Just as they owe us nothing.

So when these migrants commit crimes it is all the more galling because they absolutely should not be here

I know the term racist gets thrown around too much. But this is actual racism. At least you’re honest about it though.

Migration Megathread

Comments