|
Although this thread does not function under the same strict guidelines as the USPMT, it is still a general practice on TL to provide a source with an explanation on why it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Failure to do so will result in a mod action. |
Would-be refugees hoping to flee war in the Middle East are using Facebook as their compass for finding the people smugglers they hope will get them to a better life in Europe.
The U.S.-based website and other social media that were once used to help mobilise the "Arab Spring" uprisings now host information services for those escaping the Syrian civil war and other conflicts in the region.
There refugees can find much of what they need to know, right down to the prices, fees, bribes they will have to pay on a journey fraught with dangers ranging from drowning at sea to suffocating in a lorry.
On top of this, messaging apps such as WhatsApp and Viber help them en route to contact smugglers, friends and families alike while Internet mapping ensures they don't get lost.
In Facebook groups set up in Arabic, users post phone numbers of contacts they say can take refugees from the Turkish coast to nearby Greek islands or even further into Europe, a continent struggling to cope with the migration crisis.
For those seeking a boat ride to Greece, details on where best to cross the Serbian-Hungarian border, or the price for being smuggled all the way from Turkey to Germany, users of these groups appear to offer many of the answers.
An ad posted this week offered a late availability seat in rubber dinghy departing from the Turkish seaside city of Izmir, one of the main points of departure for Syrian refugees trying to reach Greece. The price: $1,200.
"The trip is tomorrow, 100 percent, for sure," it said. "They'll give you a free life jacket." Another post offered places on a more comfortable "tourist yacht" at 2,500 euros ($2,800).
Facebook guides refugees before they even leave Syria, said Muhammed Salih Ali, head of the Izmir-based Association for Solidarity With Syrian Refugees.
Many are told on Facebook pages to make their way to the Izmir district of Basmane, the informal headquarters in Turkey for traffickers and those hoping to make the passage.
"They are able to make contact on Facebook with intermediaries. Once they are in Basmane, they can also spend three or five days at hotels and investigate their options. They speak with others about which smuggler is more affordable or has a reputation for safety," he said in an interview
uk.reuters.com
|
Schengen survivability look grimmer every day. Merkel invited all Syrian refugees to Germany, then ask other countries to take their parts, ofc lot of them refuse. Now Merkel is warning Schengen could be at risk ? What the fuck seriously.
Schengen is one of the best thing that happened to Europe, but politics are doing ass shit to deal with the crisis. I start wondering if closing border won't be that bad afterall.
|
Or you know the other countries could finally do their part and take up a reasonable amount of refugees instead of lamenting all day.
|
There's also the whole issue with lots of economically motivated migrants disguising as refugees in addition to the richer EU countries being unproportionally heavily burdened.
|
United States43991 Posts
I fail to see how letting, say, one Syrian stay for every thousand Brits is going to cause an undue burden upon our people or fundamentally change the culture of our nation. We can do more and the argument "well why us, why aren't other people paying" doesn't change that, nor stand up when others are doing more than we are.
|
The key is to refuse to do anything unless other groups “do their fair share”. And also accuse people of trying to “sneak in for economic reasons.” That way you can just blame them, rather than your own inaction. While also being able to say you want to help, but not until everyone helps and you can be 100% sure you are only helping “worthy” people.
|
Europe needs a joint migration plan. And migrants need to be able to be held accountable. Right now the problem comes from both sides:
1. Most European countries are being unreasonable dicks
2. Migrants don't abide by any rules that are put in place to organize this crap. If an economic migrant is told he can't stay, it is virtually impossible to kick him out of the country (country of origin nor the migrant cooperate with that plan). Refugees try to find the country they think is best, rather than accepting that they are refugees and ANYWHERE is going to be better than where they were, etc. etc.
Of course, these two go hand in hand. It's obvious that if refugees have a better chance of being granted asylum in Sweden than in Greece, then they will do whatever they can to get to Sweden rather than staying in Greece. Most European countries being dicks has upset local governments to the point of not collaborating.
And the solution really isn't that hard, but it requires Schengen countries to give up sovereignty on their immigration policy to a central European service. Wilders, LePen and Farage are going to have a field day with that, so it will never happen.
|
On September 05 2015 02:18 KwarK wrote:
I fail to see how letting, say, one Syrian stay for every thousand Brits is going to cause an undue burden upon our people or fundamentally change the culture of our nation. We can do more and the argument "well why us, why aren't other people paying" doesn't change that, nor stand up when others are doing more than we are.
Except the numbers are nowhere near as low. Germany for example is projected to have to accommodate around 800.000 refugees this year alone.
I can understand why people would be worried about this, especially when politicians dismiss anyone who voices any concern about this as scum who shouldn't have a say.
|
United States43991 Posts
On September 05 2015 02:27 dismiss wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2015 02:18 KwarK wrote:
I fail to see how letting, say, one Syrian stay for every thousand Brits is going to cause an undue burden upon our people or fundamentally change the culture of our nation. We can do more and the argument "well why us, why aren't other people paying" doesn't change that, nor stand up when others are doing more than we are. Except the numbers are nowhere near as low. Germany for example is projected to have to accommodate around 800.000 refugees this year alone. I can understand why people would be worried about this, especially when politicians dismiss anyone who voices any concern about this as scum who shouldn't have a say.
We've taken 5,000 in the last 4 years put together. My suggestion that we could handle, say, 65,000 without too much effort is still a huge improvement on where we are at the moment. The fact that Germany has taken 160 refugees for every 1 that we have doesn't mean we're about to be flooded, it means we're being shamed by Germany.
|
On September 05 2015 02:25 Plansix wrote:
The key is to refuse to do anything unless other groups “do their fair share”. And also accuse people of trying to “sneak in for economic reasons.” That way you can just blame them, rather than your own inaction. While also being able to say you want to help, but not until everyone helps and you can be 100% sure you are only helping “worthy” people.
Wellm there's about 400.000 "refugees" from the Balcans coming to Germany this year. Countries that have been deemed safe and stable enough to essentially not allow asylum on political grounds ever. Lots of them even admit that they're not being prosecuted, yet they claim asylum rather than trying to migrate through the proper channels, just to be rejected and eventually sent back. On the hopes of using the host countries social security system as well as being paid a stipend significantly higher than what they would earn as a wage in their country of origin.
On September 05 2015 02:32 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2015 02:27 dismiss wrote:On September 05 2015 02:18 KwarK wrote:
I fail to see how letting, say, one Syrian stay for every thousand Brits is going to cause an undue burden upon our people or fundamentally change the culture of our nation. We can do more and the argument "well why us, why aren't other people paying" doesn't change that, nor stand up when others are doing more than we are. Except the numbers are nowhere near as low. Germany for example is projected to have to accommodate around 800.000 refugees this year alone. I can understand why people would be worried about this, especially when politicians dismiss anyone who voices any concern about this as scum who shouldn't have a say. We've taken 5,000 in the last 4 years put together. My suggestion that we could handle, say, 65,000 without too much effort is still a huge improvement on where we are at the moment. The fact that Germany has taken 160 refugees for every 1 that we have doesn't mean we're about to be flooded, it means we're being shamed by Germany.
This sounds reasonable to me, I'm very much in favour of a European quota making everyone help out to roughly the same degree.
|
The problem is media are lying about the true of the situation (BBC drama for instance, or the baby ashore).
Look at all the videos you see from the border of Hungary, or from boat in the sea. I don't talk about editorialised video, but genuine video without commentary on it, or weird cut.
More than 90% of these people are 20-40 adults. Males.
FFS, at least 50% of them are black, don't tell me 50% of the population of Syria is black ? C'mon you realise these people come from countries like Ghana, Mali, etc... And most of them are there for an economic purpose.
Another point I want to make is that WHY THE FUCK do they need to go in Germany ? Is France not ok ? is Hungary not ok ? What about Macedonia, Greece, and all the other countries on the path from Turkey to Germany and Sweden ?
No seriously, a vast majority of these refugees aren't refugee but economic migrants (according to Dublin II). And when they get in refugee camps in Hungary of other, they complain about their bed, tents, block the rails.
What do you want others groups to do with their "fair shares" ? you want to jail other migrants in countries like Poland or Romania ? Because that's what you gonna do or else they'll leave the country they were assigned to.
All of that will lead to the break of Schengen, and eventually Europe. Even if the will of Germany is accomplished :
1) Other countries refuse migrants and refugees : Borders are closing.
2) Other countries accept migrants and refugees : Borders need to be closed because otherwise said migrants and refugees will leave the countries.
There is no valid solution other than Closing the outer area of Schengen and processing legal claim of political refugee, and refusing other migrants at the European borders (putting people back to Lybia if they left from there, blocking arrival from Turkey, etc...). Or doing ala Australia way, paying a country like Papouasie New Guinea.
Otherwise it won't be good for Europe as a whole. Look at Sweden and all the bombing/acts because of the high number of migrants ghettos.
I prefer doing harsh solution for a better futur, than accepting en mass people without realistic way to deal with them. Thus leading to a MASSIVE surge of far right in Election, thus destroying Europe for good.
I'm betting whatever you want that Le Pen will explode in popularity and vote in the next couple of months, and the same will do with every others countries.
Sorry that sounded a bit like a rant, but these are my true feeling
|
On September 05 2015 02:18 KwarK wrote:
I fail to see how letting, say, one Syrian stay for every thousand Brits is going to cause an undue burden upon our people or fundamentally change the culture of our nation. We can do more and the argument "well why us, why aren't other people paying" doesn't change that, nor stand up when others are doing more than we are.
Because the social contract on most EU countries is not designed, or capable, to accept low income migrants.
|
There's ways you could keep people in their designated countries until they acclimate, for example barring them from work or social security in non host countries. They're not EU citizens as soon as they arrive here, so that's probably legally doable if a little ethically questionable.
|
United States43991 Posts
On September 05 2015 02:39 cLutZ wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2015 02:18 KwarK wrote:
I fail to see how letting, say, one Syrian stay for every thousand Brits is going to cause an undue burden upon our people or fundamentally change the culture of our nation. We can do more and the argument "well why us, why aren't other people paying" doesn't change that, nor stand up when others are doing more than we are. Because the social contract on most EU countries is not designed, or capable, to accept low income migrants.
We have 17 people imprisoned in the UK for every Syrian refugee. Somehow we managed to find the money to give criminals three square meals and a bed. Lots of them. We have 13,000 Brits for every 1 Syrian refugee at the moment. This is not a crippling burden.
|
On September 05 2015 02:39 Faust852 wrote:
More than 90% of these people are 20-40 adults. Males.
FFS, at least 50% of them are black, don't tell me 50% of the population of Syria is black ? C'mon you realise these people come from countries like Ghana, Mali, etc... And most of them are there for an economic purpose.
Mostly Eritrea, Somalia and Nigeria for Middle European route (Libia-->Italy) and Pakistan, Iraq for route trough Greece to be precise.
On the sidenote if our current government is going to accept anything more than houndres of migrants then they our going to be voted out of office (elections coming very soon). The party which is going to win isnt exactly pro-european.
|
A big reason that large amounts of the refugees are young males is that it is a very hard and dangerous journey to enter europe from the places they are from. Just hear some stories about what they have to go through to reach a country like Germany. And such a journey has a much higher success rate if you are young and male.
And do you really think that ONLY syria is a country that warrants escaping from? A lot of african countries have some sort of murderous situation for some parts of their population going on. Which explains why a lot of the refugees are black. They are also fleeing, just not from the war in syria, but from one of the other horrible conflicts in africa.
But of course it is a lot easier to simply say that they all just want to mooch of our social systems than to accept that there are large amounts of legitimate refugees because a large part of the world is a horrible place to be born in.
I am disgusted by the extreme egoism a lot of people display when talking about refugees.
|
On September 05 2015 02:51 Simberto wrote:
A big reason that large amounts of the refugees are young males is that it is a very hard and dangerous journey to enter europe from the places they are from. Just hear some stories about what they have to go through to reach a country like Germany. And such a journey has a much higher success rate if you are young and male.
And do you really think that ONLY syria is a country that warrants escaping from? A lot of african countries have some sort of murderous situation for some parts of their population going on. Which explains why a lot of the refugees are black. They are also fleeing, just not from the war in syria, but from one of the other horrible conflicts in africa.
But of course it is a lot easier to simply say that they all just want to mooch of our social systems than to accept that there are large amounts of legitimate refugees because a large part of the world is a horrible place to be born in.
I am disgusted by the extreme egoism a lot of people display when talking about refugees.
It doesn't matter what they want? Its just math that they likely will, as will thier children. After the at, it depends on the assimilation rate, and historically that is low in Europe, and even lower amongst noon-European minorities.
|
The argument of Women and Children being to weak to cross the Europe is stupid as fuck.
First, why would women be weaker than man at going from Turkey to Bulgaria to Romania to Hungary to Austria to Germany ? I mean none of these countries are hostile am I right ? I don't get how a woman would find it any more difficult than a man. Children is the same, if they are >10yo, this would pose no problem whatsoever.
I do agree for crossing the sea though.
But anyway, WHY should we accept ILLEGAL people, crossing the borders without their right while MILLIONS are actually asking LEGALLY for getting the refugee status ? Why these people who can't wait their turn deserve a place before legitimate people going the legal way ? Please answer that.
|
On September 05 2015 02:51 Simberto wrote:
A big reason that large amounts of the refugees are young males is that it is a very hard and dangerous journey to enter europe from the places they are from. Just hear some stories about what they have to go through to reach a country like Germany. And such a journey has a much higher success rate if you are young and male.
And do you really think that ONLY syria is a country that warrants escaping from? A lot of african countries have some sort of murderous situation for some parts of their population going on. Which explains why a lot of the refugees are black. They are also fleeing, just not from the war in syria, but from one of the other horrible conflicts in africa.
But of course it is a lot easier to simply say that they all just want to mooch of our social systems than to accept that there are large amounts of legitimate refugees because a large part of the world is a horrible place to be born in.
I am disgusted by the extreme egoism a lot of people display when talking about refugees.
I'll quote you just because it will prolly be the only time we agree.
Middle-class Europeans need to see refugees as fellow human beings, instead of competitors for government welfare. Also shows that Big governments lead to racism and nationalism in a pretty rational way.
|
On September 05 2015 03:04 Faust852 wrote:
The argument of Women and Children being to weak to cross the Europe is stupid as fuck.
First, why would women be weaker than man at going from Turkey to Bulgaria to Romania to Hungary to Austria to Germany ? I mean none of these countries are hostile am I right ? I don't get how a woman would find it any more difficult than a man. Children is the same, if they are >10yo, this would pose no problem whatsoever.
I do agree for crossing the sea though.
But anyway, WHY should we accept ILLEGAL people, crossing the borders without their right while MILLIONS are actually asking LEGALLY for getting the refugee status ? Why these people who can't wait their turn deserve a place before legitimate people going the legal way ? Please answer that.
They are refugees from war and violence. If you refuse because they didn't do it "legally" them, many of them will die if they return home and wait their turn.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
