Ireland to assist in migrant crisis in the Med.

conorh91

stunmer wrote: »

We need to remove this ridiculous (unenforceable) blasphemy law here in Ireland.

If you believe it's unenforceable, why then do you believe in the necessity of removing it?

If it is unenforceable it is already redundant.

stunmer

conorh91 wrote: »

If you believe it's unenforceable, why then do you believe in the necessity of removing it?

If it is unenforceable it is already redundant.

Because it gives merit to some people why may think it is enforceable. It would shut up people like Dr Ali Selim who threaten to sue anybody who publishes the pictures from the Charlie Hebdo magazine under the defamation act.

Why would you want an unenforceable law in the Defamation act and mentioned in our Constitution?

VinLieger

conorh91 wrote: »

If you believe it's unenforceable, why then do you believe in the necessity of removing it?

If it is unenforceable it is already redundant.

Theres the threat that nobody even the media knows whats allowed, look at the charlie hebdo cartoons all irish media were afraid to publish due to the threat from that eejit "doctor" ali selim

RichardCeann

conorh91 wrote: »

If you believe it's unenforceable, why then do you believe in the necessity of removing it?

If it is unenforceable it is already redundant.

Enforceable, unenforceable - it is still ridiculous that such a law is in our statue book. What will ensure that it remains redundant is it's removal.

Back on topic. Swedens anti mass immigration party top the polls.

UPDATED: More people support Jimmie Åkesson’s Sweden Democrats than any other political group in Sweden, according to a new poll which puts the nationalists in the lead for the first time in history.

The Sweden Democrat party has been gradually rising in popularity since it scored 12.9 percent in the country’s last general election in September 2014.

But a survey by pollsters YouGov published in Sweden’s Metro newspaper on Thursday suggested that 25.2 percent of those questioned would now vote for the nationalists, who are calling for dramatic cuts in immigration to Sweden.

http://www.thelocal.se/20150820/swedens-nationalists-lead-polls-for-first-time

Even the uber liberal Swedes are starting to lose patience with this nonsense.

DeadHand

Irregardless of whether there is a blasphemy law or not Mohammad is now sacred to everyone in Europe. This veneration was forced upon Europe by violence and was unchallenged thanks to the submission and cowardice of our media and political classes.

What will Islam force upon us next? Young indigenous women in Swedish cities have already taken to dressing modestly and dying their naturally beautiful blonde hair dark so as not to attract the sexual aggression of Muslim youths the prevailing attitude among whom is rape is no big deal for indigenous women and children as they are inherently immoral anyway. This attitude is confirmed by the rape statistics of that ruined country which sees migrants staggeringly over represented as perpetrators and ethnic Swedes over represented as victims. Sweden is just ten years ahead of most other European countries; Sweden is the future.

The reaction to the Charlie Hebdo massacre ensured that democracy lost more ground to Islamism. Islamism is winning, it is changing Europe and it is changing it for the worse.

conorhal

stunmer wrote: »

Because it gives merit to some people why may think it is enforceable. It would shut up people like Dr Ali Selim who threaten to sue anybody who publishes the pictures from the Charlie Hebdo magazine under the defamation act.

Why would you want an unenforceable law in the Defamation act and mentioned in our Constitution?

You're rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic. Our blasphemy laws are irrelevant. What really stifles debate is the mutant political correctness that has evolved into a form or McCarthyism with a dash of 'Salem witch trial hysteria thrown in' regards any negative commentary about immigration, the immigrant quangocrats have very effectively deployed ths nonsence to silence any debate in the issue. That is the far more pressing danger. As usual though navel gazing is distracting people form the real threats.

Uncle Ben

conorhal wrote: »

You're rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic. Our blasphemy laws are irrelevant. What really stifles debate is the mutant political correctness that has evolved into a form or McCarthyism with a dash of 'Salem witch trial hysteria thrown in' regards any negative commentary about immigration, the immigrant quangocrats have very effectively deployed ths nonsence to silence any debate in the issue. That is the far more pressing danger. As usual though navel gazing is distracting people form the real threats.

FYP 'Naval gazing is distracting people from the real threats.'

conorh91

stunmer wrote: »

It would shut up people like Dr Ali Selim who threaten to sue anybody who publishes the pictures from the Charlie Hebdo magazine under the defamation act.

What are you afraid of? You think it's unenforceable, remember? Surely any litigation would only prove your point?

Why would you want an unenforceable law in the Defamation act and mentioned in our Constitution?

It isn't unenforceable.

conorhal

RichardCeann wrote: »

Enforceable, unenforceable - it is still ridiculous that such a law is in our statue book. What will ensure that it remains redundant is it's removal.

Back on topic. Swedens anti mass immigration party top the polls.



http://www.thelocal.se/20150820/swedens-nationalists-lead-polls-for-first-time

Even the uber liberal Swedes are starting to lose patience with this nonsense.

I see that elsewhere there's an article about Gothenberg seeing a surge in migrants trying to access the UK from the port there. Could it become the new Calis?
http://www.thelocal.se/20150820/migrants-trying-to-reach-uk-from-gothenburg

Officials have told Swedish media that while staff have long been used to discovering stowaways trying to get into the Nordic country from cargo ships, in 2015 the practice seems to have been replaced by a trend in the opposite direction, with migrants desperate to sail away from the biggest port in the Nordics on vessels heading to the UK.

So, migrants are now fleeing uber liberal Sweden? That bodes well......

RichardCeann

They are fleeing Sweden now! I don't know what sort of utopia they are expecting to find in the UK, but if they think it is much better there than Sweden, they are in for a big surprise.

conorh91

RichardCeann wrote: »

They are fleeing Sweden now! I don't know what sort of utopia they are expecting to find in the UK, but if they think it is much better there than Sweden, they are in for a big surprise.

I wouldn't be surprised if labour regulations were less strict in the UK, or less rigidly enforced.

I wouldn't think it's the "utopia" they're fleeing, it's probably the bureaucracy and the high degree of compliance with employment and immigration regulations that may be easier to evade in the UK.

jonnyringo

Yea I totally agree , we in Britain are too soft on imigrants , especialy the amount of irish imigrants we take , we should start by stopping the irish , they the nearest foreigners . Also America should jail all illegal imigrants for 20 yrs hard labour . who don't have green cards . then when we have achieved this I think all foreigners should be deported from Britain , I would stat with the irish because they don't work they live on benefits , council housing and drink and get drunk then fight all the time .

annascott

There is supposedly a housing crisis in Uk and Ireland, but yet we are all taking in thousands of illegal migrants. There is something terribly wrong here...

johnty56

jonnyringo wrote: »

Yea I totally agree , we in Britain are too soft on imigrants , especialy the amount of irish imigrants we take , we should start by stopping the irish , they the nearest foreigners . Also America should jail all illegal imigrants for 20 yrs hard labour . who don't have green cards . then when we have achieved this I think all foreigners should be deported from Britain , I would stat with the irish because they don't work they live on benefits , council housing and drink and get drunk then fight all the time .

Hahahahahahhahah!!! Very good:)

anyone like to open a book as to which of our resident proponents of immigration and open door policies has opened this account??:)

Wibbs

johnty56 wrote: »

Hahahahahahhahah!!! Very good:)

anyone like to open a book as to which of our resident proponents of immigration and open door policies has opened this account??:)

A not very educated one judging by the writing. In any event that argument is a red herring. The vast majority of the Irish diaspora emigrated to countries who had no real social safety nets. They worked or they starved. Many of said nations were built on the basis of immigration. That was how they came to be. Bit of a difference with this current lot swarming in looking for benefits.

homerjay2005

jonnyringo wrote: »

Yea I totally agree , we in Britain are too soft on imigrants , especialy the amount of irish imigrants we take , we should start by stopping the irish , they the nearest foreigners . Also America should jail all illegal imigrants for 20 yrs hard labour . who don't have green cards . then when we have achieved this I think all foreigners should be deported from Britain , I would stat with the irish because they don't work they live on benefits , council housing and drink and get drunk then fight all the time .

i know your only a troll and on the wind up seen as there is only 1 post but just incase people actually believe the Irish are the problem in the UK then ill give you some facts.

% of Irish in Uk of total population - 0.6%.
% of English in Ireland of total population - 5.5%.

serious difference there, but lets not allow facts to stand in the way of the reality eh?

RichardCeann

The figures say different

jonnyringo wrote: »

I would stat with the irish because they don't work they live on benefits , council housing and drink and get drunk then fight all the time .

Some 11,222 United Kingdom citizens are claiming the dole in this State, that is some five times as many as Irish citizens claiming in Britain.

http://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/the-truth-behind-welfare-claimants-in-uk-1.2077510

Unemployment among the Irish community in Australia is just 2.4%.

http://www.businessinsider.com/australia-is-the-land-of-plenty-for-the-biggest-wave-of-irish-emigrants-in-a-generation-2013-3?IR=T

conorh91

Wibbs wrote: »

A not very educated one judging by the writing. In any event that argument is a red herring. The vast majority of the Irish diaspora emigrated to countries who had no real social safety nets. They worked or they starved. Many of said nations were built on the basis of immigration. That was how they came to be. Bit of a difference with this current lot swarming in looking for benefits.

I'd say that posters grasp of language is about as well-informed as your analysis of migrants' intentions.

By all means we need strict and stricter border controls in this country. We are granting naturalization at a rate that seems unsustainable and our asylum and Protection system is too cumbersome and inefficient.

But there is little-to-no proof that migrants are arriving with work shy intentions. Laziness doesn't seem to tend to characterize migrants anywhere. Real sloths tend to stay at home, hurl in ditches, and opine from keyboards.

conorhal

Wibbs wrote: »

A not very educated one judging by the writing. In any event that argument is a red herring. The vast majority of the Irish diaspora emigrated to countries who had no real social safety nets. They worked or they starved. Many of said nations were built on the basis of immigration. That was how they came to be. Bit of a difference with this current lot swarming in looking for benefits.

He also conveniently ignores the fact that many travelled there as UK citizens. My granddad was born before 1922 and this entitled to a British passport. He also ignores the fact that there will always be trade, cultural and social ties between neighbour states. Plenty of French work in Geneva, plenty of Swiss live and work in France, that's perfectly natural and governed by the laws pertaining between the two states that allow it. They didn't rock up in a dingy from half way around the world with a hand out.

conorhal

conorh91 wrote: »

I'd say that posters grasp of language is about as well-informed as your analysis of migrants' intentions.

By all means we need strict and stricter border controls in this country. We are granting naturalization at a rate that seems unsustainable and our asylum and Protection system is too cumbersome and inefficient.

But there is little-to-no proof that migrants are arriving with work shy intentions. Laziness doesn't seem to tend to characterize migrants anywhere. Real sloths tend to stay at home, hurl in ditches, and opine from keyboards.

I've said it before and I'll say it again. Whatever their intentions, what are the realities of their prospects? Or are all those ghettos filled with under employed individuals living in the 9th century all across Europe a figment of my imagination?
Do we really need to replicate the French banlieue's in Tyrrelstown just so that minister Aodhan O'Riordan can feel good about himself? The fact that over 50% of the social housing list in Fingal is made up of foreign nationals would suggest that we're well on our way to creating them.

conorh91

conorhal wrote: »

I've said it before and I'll say it again. Whatever their intentions, what are the realities of their prospects?

That's a practical and credible point. I'm in favour of tighter immigration controls, and surely such an improvement would be in the best interests of recent immigrants themselves.

I feel sorry for genuine asylum seekers, for example, who are spending years in Direct Provision because of the burden of claims that are clearly without merit.

There are children in Direct Provision centers today whose parents are genuine victims of persecution, who may even be dealing with issues like PTSD and other psychiatric disorders. They cannot get swift access to justice because unjustified claims are forcing them to wait the guts of a year for an afternoon before the High Court.

But we can never have a serious debate so long as idiots are blackening this side of the debate with derogatory generalizations about "swarms" of spongers, effectively.

Ideally these commentators would clear off, otherwise their kind of rhetoric drives away most decent people with a conscience, who perceive as bigoted any argument in favour of a better-organised, more efficient, fairer immigration policy.

People who want tighter controls are not all racists jealously guarding their welfare. We seek fairness and efficiency, not petty jibes, or counting black people in dole queues. But if we don't actually make this clear, there will be no discussion.

RichardCeann

conorh91 wrote: »

I feel sorry for genuine asylum seekers, for example, who are spending years in Direct Provision because of the burden of claims that are clearly without merit.

Genuine asylum seekers are not spending years in DP. Their applications are dealt with extremely swiftly. The median time for processing applications in 2014 was 15 weeks for non-prioritised applications and 4 weeks for prioritised application.


As for them waiting for years to get their case heard in the HC, the processing time for pre-leave hearing (leave to apply for JR) is 9 months and post-leave for the hearing is 4 months.

RichardCeann

conorh91 wrote: »

But there is little-to-no proof that migrants are arriving with work shy intentions. Laziness doesn't seem to tend to characterize migrants anywhere. Real sloths tend to stay at home, hurl in ditches, and opine from keyboards.

Just under one in four of all non EU citizens resident throughout the member states are not employed or not signed up to an educational or language course. No evidence, indeed. In Sweden, for example, 49.8% of non EU citizens are not employed or registered in an educational or language course.

PDF with the figures here: http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_STAT-14-119_en.htm

WakeUp

conorhal wrote: »

I've said it before and I'll say it again. Whatever their intentions, what are the realities of their prospects? Or are all those ghettos filled with under employed individuals living in the 9th century all across Europe a figment of my imagination?
Do we really need to replicate the French banlieue's in Tyrrelstown just so that minister Aodhan O'Riordan can feel good about himself? The fact that over 50% of the social housing list in Fingal is made up of foreign nationals would suggest that we're well on our way to creating them.

some of their intentions are quite clear that being thousands of the economic migrants are prepared to literally storm European borders and frontiers en mass to get in.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OmqOlxNQABI

Eutow

johnty56 wrote: »

Hahahahahahhahah!!! Very good:)

anyone like to open a book as to which of our resident proponents of immigration and open door policies has opened this account??:)

I could guess. There is one high profile poster with four words in his username that loves starting sentences with lower case letters like the poster you quoted.

KingBrian2

stunmer wrote: »

We need to remove this ridiculous (unenforceable) blasphemy law here in Ireland.

These refugees must understand upon coming to Ireland they do have the freedom to practice their own religion in any way they want as long as there are no breaches of human rights. However, they must also understand that in Ireland their religion is open to criticism, satire and ridicule.

With this influx of migrants from very religious countries, never has it been more important to make our position clear. We do not want to go down the same route as the UK and Denmark where criticising someones religion is often seen as being "racist" or "bigoted" and harming their ability to integrate.

Would getting rid of blasphemy hurt tourism or generate greater encouragement for people to come here. Mixed view on the one hand we want the right people coming here namely nice tourists on the other hand we should tell the world we have values and one of them is come to Ireland your religion will be ridiculed that is what you have to accept before arriving here.

RichardCeann

KingBrian2 wrote: »

Would getting rid of blasphemy hurt tourism or generate greater encouragement for people to come here. Mixed view on the one hand we want the right people coming here namely nice tourists on the other hand we should tell the world we have values and one of them is come to Ireland your religion will be ridiculed that is what you have to accept before arriving here.

What sort of dirty looking eejit bases their holiday destination on whether or not a country has a blasphemy law in place?

KingBrian2

RichardCeann wrote: »

What sort of dirty looking eejit bases their holiday destination on whether or not a country has a blasphemy law in place?

I don't know how about Muslims. They won't come if we got rid of blasphemy. They might be offended.

recedite

snubbleste wrote: »

German Interior minister is in favour of the return of internal EU border controls. This is a result of Greece & Italy failing to process migrants correctly
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/eureferendum/11815293/German-border-control-plans-raise-hopes-for-EU-reform.html

Ireland is becoming efficient at picking up migrants from the Libyan coast and transporting them to Italy.
Italy and Greece are becoming very efficient at moving migrants from the coastal areas to transport hubs, where they can exit these countries quicker.

Schengen allows them to move freely until they reach the edge of the Schengen area, eg Calais.

The whole system works like a well oiled escalator, with Germany, Sweden and Britain waiting at the top of it with open arms. Well, maybe not so much of the "open arms" in Britain

johnty56

750,000 mostly male, 18-25 year olds on the march to Germany this year... been a while since Europe saw that level of movement of young men en masse.. and the last time they were coming out of Germany:)

Letree

My god.. even our resident lefties are coming round to the idea of controlled immigration. I have been saying this for years and was frequently abused by them for saying so. Its a shame it takes the crazy scenes in the likes of Kos, Calais and the Med to bring them to their senses.

nokia69

Letree wrote: »

My god.. even our resident lefties are coming round to the idea of controlled immigration. I have been saying this for years and was frequently abused by them for saying so. Its a shame it takes the crazy scenes in the likes of Kos, Calais and the Med to bring them to their senses.

I hope you're right

but I expect them to double down and keep calling people racists

RichardCeann

The Greek Defence Minister arrived in Kos today due to the crisis. The locals showed him their displeasure at the whole situation.

conorh91

RichardCeann wrote: »

Just under one in four of all non EU citizens resident throughout the member states are not employed or not signed up to an educational or language course.

OK... elaborate on this point as you wish, but don't imply that I am contesting this.

Unemployment is a massive problem among immigrants, which is the primary reason why inward migration must be controlled. Nobody claimed otherwise. But the article to which you referred claimed that employment was a driver for immigration to the UK, and not unemployment.

I am countering the ignorant suggestion that the "current lot" are" swarming in looking for benefits."

That, in my opinion is an ignorant and a pretty disgusting statement, considering the depths (no perverse pun intended) of risk these migrants are willing to endure in trying to reach the shore of Europe.

In short, the basis for controlling immigration is not disputed. In fact, I was arguing that point, and referencing those timelines on appeal and judicial review, long before you signed up to this website.

However, demeaning these human beings as a "swarm" of parasites, effectively, should not be acceptable to anyone. Whoever he thinks he is.

RichardCeann

conorh91 wrote: »

OK... elaborate on this point as you wish, but don't imply that I am contesting this.

How can you contest something I just backed up with a link? I am not making it up.

conorh91 wrote:

Unemployment is a massive problem among immigrants, which is the primary reason why inward migration must be controlled. Nobody claimed otherwise. But the article to which you referred claimed that employment was a driver for immigration to the UK, and not unemployment.

What? I linked to an press release and PDF that showed non EU citizens unemployment rates throughout the member states. Nearly one in four are not employed or registered in a language or educational course.

If these people cannot pay their own way,do not have refugee status or subsidiary protection, then they should be cut off and asked to leave. People seem to think that the member states are humanitarian charitable organisations. Immigration is meant to plug gaps in your labour market and encourage entrepreneurs to set up shop in your gaff and create jobs. Not for a huge number of people to come here and require state support and housing.

conorh91 wrote:

However, demeaning these human beings as a "swarm" of parasites, effectively, should not be acceptable to anyone. Whoever he thinks he is.

When hundreds of thousands of people are illegally entering the EU, the words used to describe them entering is the least of my worries.

RichardCeann

conorh91 wrote: »

which is the primary reason why inward migration must be controlled.

conorh91 wrote:

We have to accept an increased level of migration, and we have to invest in these countries of origin in order to stabilise the flow of migration. I genuinely do not see how there is a place for anyone who still wishes for splendid isolation.

You seem to be at odds with your own position. And no, no we do not have to accept increased numbers of illegals and fraudulent asylum seekers. As for your quip about "splendid isolation", the EU has, and will continue to have, millions of legal migrants arriving in member states each and every year.

The last para sounds very Peter Sutherlandesque. Are you involved in the migration industry yourself?

stunmer

conorhal wrote: »

You're rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic. Our blasphemy laws are irrelevant. What really stifles debate is the mutant political correctness that has evolved into a form or McCarthyism with a dash of 'Salem witch trial hysteria thrown in' regards any negative commentary about immigration, the immigrant quangocrats have very effectively deployed ths nonsence to silence any debate in the issue. That is the far more pressing danger. As usual though navel gazing is distracting people form the real threats.

I think what you are trying to say in the bolded words above is that "Militant political correctness regarding any of the negative aspects of immigration has been used to silence the debate on immigration." I agree this has been used to silence the 'no to mass immigration' side of the debate. However, I am assuming that Ireland has already accepted some future level of immigration and some immigrants will arrive on our shore in the coming months. I am not happy with this decision but I am suggesting changes we should make to ensure Ireland does not have to deal with the same immigrant issues other European countries have had to deal with (and largely failed).

I don't understand your reference to "McCarthyism with a dash of 'Salem witch trial hysteria thrown in'".

While I am completely against mass immigration, I understand Ireland has agreed to take some migrants. If this is the case we need to do everything in our power to ensure these migrants integrate into our society and do not have their own separate community like we see in many parts of the UK, France, Denmark, Sweden and the Netherlands.
Separate communities = lack of integration = cultural and religious tensions.
In my opinion, the Polish immigrant community integrated very well into Irish society. Obviously the Polish and Irish cultures are far more similar.

I am not bringing up removal of blasphemy laws as navel-gazing. Any future terrorist threat based on offence to religion should be nipped in the bud as early as possible by making it clear to immigrants (primarily Muslims) that religion and ideas in general are fair game for criticism and ridicule. We will not restrict our freedom of speech and expression to accommodate some backward religious practices.

We need to ensure any Islamist (Political Islam) ideas are not welcome in our country and such ideas should be strongly discouraged.

Any sexism based on cultural or religious practices should be open to ridicule and strongly discouraged.

Any hatred or intolerance of homosexuals for should be strongly discouraged.

Again, we need to adopt the message : "If you do not like it here, you can leave"

or even better, before they step foot in Ireland: "If you don't like the Irish way of life don't come to Ireland"

The longer we wait to make these changes, while more immigration is occurring, the more difficult it will be to enforce basic freedoms (such as the ability to criticise religions) due to the worry of offending a certain minority group.

stunmer

KingBrian2 wrote: »

I don't know how about Muslims. They won't come if we got rid of blasphemy. They might be offended.

So?

snubbleste

Italian coastguard has received SOS calls from 18 vessels - 4 boats and 14 rubber dinghies - off the Libyan coast.
Estimated 3000 migrants involved.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-34028487

snubbleste

Testimony from 432 migrants from the rescue of a stricken boat on August 19 suggest the vessel had been packed with more than ten times the number of people it was designed for, with many of the passengers, locked below decks. They had each paid the traffickers €2,000 for the passage from Egypt to Italy, according to statements given to police.
On board, the crew were reported to be demanding further payment to allow those locked in the hold to come up temporarily for air.
http://mgafrica.com/article/2015-08-22-the-flood-continues-italy-rescuing-3000-migrants-18-boats-off-libya

€2000 x 432 migrants = lotto jackpot

rgossip30

homerjay2005 wrote: »

i know your only a troll and on the wind up seen as there is only 1 post but just incase people actually believe the Irish are the problem in the UK then ill give you some facts.

% of Irish in Uk of total population - 0.6%.
% of English in Ireland of total population - 5.5%.

serious difference there, but lets not allow facts to stand in the way of the reality eh?

The Africans ,Pakistanis etc who were overstayers in the UK should have been sent back in exchange for the Irish there a better option.

RichardCeann

snubbleste wrote: »

€2000 x 432 migrants = lotto jackpot

Not for the Germans it is not.

Based on new projections for the number of asylum seekers expected to arrive in Germany this year, the country may have to find €10 billion to fund its already creaking system.




Journalists at the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung arrived at the figure simply by multiplying the flat rate local governments are paid by their states per refugee of between €12,000 and €13,000 by 800,000.
State governments had until now been planning to spend a total of between €5 and €6 billion on supporting the 450,000 anticipated asylum seekers this year.
But Interior Minister Thomas de Maizière's announcement on Wednesday that the figure could increase by more than two-thirds has prompted fresh calls for the federal government to stump up more cash.
While de Maizière acknowledged that the refugee numbers represented "a real challenge" for the country, he insisted on Wednesday that "Germany is not overwhelmed."
While the €10bn figure is large, it remains a drop in the ocean - 0.34 percent - of Germany's GDP of €2.915 trillion in 2014.
And it's less than one-fifth of the cash risked by Germany in emergency lending to Greece over that country's three bailout programmes.
Last year, the total amount spent by the federal states on supporting refugees was €2.2 billion.
“The federal government must quickly say how it will take on a share of the costs of caring for refugees in a long-term, structural way,” North Rhine-Westphalia minister-president Hannelore Kraft said on Wednesday.
Ministers in Berlin have so far promised €1 billion extra to be divided among the states – far short of the total needed.
States want tax increases
Some state governments are already calling for tax increases to pay the differences.
The state must “improve things on the income side,” Schleswig-Holstein finance minister Monika Heinold said, adding that wealthier people should bear the lion's share of the burden through an increase in inheritance tax and the financial transactions tax.
Heinold added that the solidarity charge, which has been added to everyone's taxes since reunification to fund reconstruction in the former East Germany, should be diverted towards the asylum system.
The northerly state has already tripled its asylum budget for 2015 to €300 million.

http://www.thelocal.de/20150820/asylum-could-cost-germany-10bn-in-2015

The EU does the traffickers work for them, ferries the migrants across, then shoulder the costs of putting them up whilst they absolutely coin it in. It is an absolutely crazy situation and it should never have been allowed to get to this.

BlaasForRafa

snubbleste wrote: »

Italian coastguard has received SOS calls from 18 vessels - 4 boats and 14 rubber dinghies - off the Libyan coast.
Estimated 3000 migrants involved.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-34028487

Should tow them back to Libya rather than giving them access to Europe.

RichardCeann

What a **** state our nations are in where the coincidence of US marines being in the right place at the right timewas the difference between dozens, if not hundreds, massacred on a train by a North African, living in Spain and who spent time in Syria with Islamic extremists. We are some of the richest and most powerful countries in the world yet we can't even defend our own poxy borders and we can't even police our countries from within. Things are only going to get worse given the droves of North Africans, Middle Easterners and West Africans who espouse some of the most extreme violent religious ideologies in the world (they can't even co-exist with fellow non co-religios compatriots in refugee camps). Thousands more are pouring through our borders every day and millions more will be making their way. When will enough be enough? What is the endgame here? According to a recent Eurobarometer poll immigration is the most pressing issue amongst the people of Europe, yet the current fcukery continues unabated.

It won't end well.

snubbleste

Thousands of migrants storm border in an attempt to leave EU

timmyntc

snubbleste wrote: »

Thousands of migrants storm border in an attempt to leave EU

Bit of a misleading name there for the article, granted they are leaving the EU through entry to Macedonia but only so they can enter the mainland via Hungary.

Hull said large numbers of Syrians had earlier moved back from the point of crossing to separate themselves from other nationalities.


"They want to separate themselves from the other nationalities; the Pakistanis, the Afghans, the Iraqis...what they say is that all these other nationalities claim to be Syrians as well, because it is the Syrians who have the most valid claim to asylum.


"They are refugees, they are fleeing civil war. Many of the others, they say, are economic migrants."

Sums it all up fairly well. The majority of all mediterranean migrants are these well dressed economic migrants coming to Europe with an 'American Dream' idea that once in Europe they can make their fortune.



Nothing could be further from the truth.

Galwayguy35

timmyntc wrote: »

Bit of a misleading name there for the article, granted they are leaving the EU through entry to Macedonia but only so they can enter the mainland via Hungary.


Sums it all up fairly well. The majority of all mediterranean migrants are these well dressed economic migrants coming to Europe with an 'American Dream' idea that once in Europe they can make their fortune.



Nothing could be further from the truth.

Correct.

They are coming to Europe with little or no English and a very basic education, oh yeah not to mention doing so illegally.

snubbleste

timmyntc wrote: »

Bit of a misleading name there for the article, granted they are leaving the EU through entry to Macedonia but only so they can enter the mainland via Hungary.

It's true! :cool:
They are already in an EU country and are storming the border of an even poorer country.

RichardCeann

I see the media are still only posting photos of women and children to try and give the impression that they are all all genuine refugees and not predominantly young males. Only 11% of 'irregular migrants' were women, according to Frontex.

KingBrian2

The human trafficking that was coming from the satellite states of the Soviet Union was dismantled after the Berlin Wall was removed. Thankfully the political class came together to put an end to the trafficking. Now it has recommenced this time in the Mediterranean. A sensible asylum policy is needed like back then to handle all the displaced people.