simple1
-
Posts
19,478 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Events
Forums
Downloads
Quizzes
Gallery
Blogs
Posts posted by simple1
-
-
They will have to get off Sicily first but, Italy shares 4 land borders with Austria, Switzerland, Slovenia, and of course the weak link in "theChain" - France. The horde have little chance of crossing into the former 3 countries mentioned but France will be under pressure to keep its border open. I hope they prevail and keep it closed. I wonder what the French would think if they knew how Islam views them from the Muslim perspective. Here is paraphrased quote of how Islamic history is taught about Sala-din's reaction on retaking Jerusalem from the Franks (French): It was not, however, desirable to enter into any close relations with the Franks, who are seen through Muslim eyes as emerging from the fog and perpetual winter of the unflavoured lands of the Ptolemaic sixth clime, and were consequently savage, treacherous, and filthy (both literally and metaphorically). They brought with them only pollution. Here is the context for Saladin's elaborate washing of the Dome of the Rock with rose water after his recapture of Jerusalem. - See more at: http://www.historytoday.com/malcolm-barber/crusades-islamic-perspectives#sthash.osdMzeN6.dpuf
I have said before Muslims don't know our perspective of history only what they believe and are taught about us - and it ain't good.
Likely to be an accurate description at the time
-
Obama brings back the Muslims and Thank God the Pope took 3 Christian Families!
Correction - three families of the Islamic faith
-
She pleaded guilty. Queensland judge gave her a one-month good behaviour bond with no conviction recorded, A$1000.00 fine.
-
A Swiss national residing in Germany was prosecuted under the law referenced by Naan (apparently legislated during the rule of the Kaiser) after receiving a complaint by the Swiss government; the matter before the Court is not unique.
The EU - Turkey deal, mainly pushed through by Germany, so far appears to be successful in outcome (refer below). From a realpolitik view one can understand Merkel's wish not to upset the apple cart and let the complaint be dealt with by a Court.
"European Council President Donald Tusk spoke before European Parliament in Strasbourg, noting that the numbers of migrants coming to Greece from Turkey across the Aegean Sea has dropped significantly. In January, he said, it was 70,000 people, in March it was just 30,000 and in April, just 1,000 people have arrived thus far. thus far"
-
The very definition of show boating tokenism.
Interesting he only took some with rock sold PAPERWORK.
That's not very revolutionary.
It would have been a real statement to take 1000 without papers.
If people are legit war refugees, how is it reasonable to expect they all have solid papers?
The Vatican has for years had a well established specialised armed security function to protect the Pope, who also provide protection when he's traveling. To establish people are legitimate asylum seekers requires security / background checks.
-
At least the Pope, who has been highlighting the plight of Christians persecuted in the Middle East is doing a little to help them.........hang on.
If you watched / read other reports there were people holding up banners during the Pope's visit claiming they were Yezidis. From a PR aspect one can assume the Pope was also intending to also take some Christians. Bureaucratic / security background checks would have been established by the Greek / Italian governments...
"There were two Christian families but their paperwork wasn't ready. [Religion] was not grounds for exemption.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-04-16/pope-taking-12-syrian-refugees-from-lesbos/7332432
-
Will they actually be housed in the Vatican which i sincerely doubt ? The local authority, like it or not, will be given responsibility.
<snip>Covered in a fair amount of detail at URL below and initially cared for by The Community of Sant'Egidio.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-04-16/pope-taking-12-syrian-refugees-from-lesbos/7332432
-
I said it in a previous thread about this already...
I really really really wish a bunch of other comedians / artists from around the world write / sing / paint some "nice" poems about erdogan in support of Boehmermann.
As you live in Thailand how about exercising 'free speech' on issues forbidden by Thai law and see what happens.
Can you explain what Thai law has to do with Germany kowtowing to Turkey?
No country in their right minds would sacrifice their citizens for a non secular muslim state. Germany under Merkel's helm is clearly not a healthy democracy.
if you cannot comprehend the hypocrisy of people living in Thailand kowtowing to Thai censorship laws, whilst banging on about German law, so be it.
-
I said it in a previous thread about this already...
I really really really wish a bunch of other comedians / artists from around the world write / sing / paint some "nice" poems about erdogan in support of Boehmermann.
As you live in Thailand how about exercising 'free speech' on issues forbidden by Thai law and see what happens.
-
A lot to do about nothing. A complaint was made, a court will decide if there is ground for a conviction. That's all.
Plus planned retraction of the current legislation, from the OP...
"She said her government had also decided that Germany's law criminalizing insults of a foreign head of state is "dispensable in the future" and intends to repeal it, effective in 2018"
-
Germany, under Merkel, is effectively surrendering the right to exist. This is called Dhimmitude- dhimmi when such behavior curries favor with muslims or muslim nations. When such behavior applies to non muslim nations it might equally be called treason. Examples: when a nation penalizes its own citizens while favoring another nations, surrendering and subordinating its own laws and virtues to accommodate/elevate/prefer inferior or alternative mores, using the power of law or its perversion to assert relativity with regard to the enforcement of laws or jurisdiction (favoring non citizens), manipulating/strong-arming the media to contrive State Narratives that support agenda or sedition, using State's wealth or Promissory powers to lien its citizens (refugee/Turkey Visa/Turkey ascension/ad naseum).
Among the core tenets of Liberalism is Free Speech, free association, freedom of the press, etc. Following the example of America, many nations established premises that recognize that Speech is primarily related to the unpopular, the rude, the disgusting, etc. Merkel's behavior is not only inexplicable but in many ways diametrically opposite the planks of much of her nation's post war politics.
The decision was reviewed by a number of German government departments, prior to permitting the Turkish government to take this matter to Court & is in fact based upon a specific component of German legislation which as far as I'm aware is not enacted elsewhere in Western countries. Usually such insults against a foreign leader, if a complaint is made, is dealt with at the diplomatic level, I bet occasionally with far worse back room consequence than a court case.
US and other Western countries have legislation in support of defamation / libel / malice, it ain't open slather for 'Free Speech'. A general overview of German law regards defamation
-
The Ahmadis, who were the first Muslims to arrive in the UK
Ahmadiyya sect was founded in 1889. Coincidentally the first mosque built in the UK was in 1889 and Sunni; Muslims were resident in the UK way before that date.
-
I don't get it. Why didn't they just bring the drones on the ship? Second question: what does this organization do with the migrants they rescue? The article doesn't seem to explain (though admittedly I only glossed it). Thailand doesn't want them as 'official' refugees, so why should they expect Thailand to help bring them in?
In any case, an organization that 'rescues' migrants is only encouraging more migrants to arrive. The only appropriate action is to escort them back. Very expensive I know, but anything else creates a moral hazard.
actually, the only appropriate action is to allow them to have a decent life in their place of origin, thereby removing the push factor that stimulates them to move away. maybe you could reflect on how bad things would need to be for you to uproot your family and become a refugee, putting yourself at the mercy of organisations such as people traffickers and the Royal Thai Navy and paying out your life's savings to do so. These are acts of desperation and some empathy for fellow human beings would not go amiss.
Tuanka, there are some here who think "empathy" is a pill people with a speech impediment take before they go clubbing!
Seriously though, you are wasting your time with the "send em back where they came from brigade".
Seems like 'empathy' is the new fascism. It's forced down everyone's throats by those comfortable and secure enough in their lives that they can afford the luxury. They think that the world can be just as nice for everybody as it is for them. Mere objectivity is seen as barbaric. Unfortunately, that's pure naivety. The objective reality is that the world is a seething cauldron of Darwinian competition. It's one group against another fighting for limited resources. The 'brotherhood of man' is a cute idea that gains ground only in times of plenty. Those who understand this are simply more objective.
You will agree that a degree of discipline and organisation in human society is needed on an everyday basis, not just for the long-term good of the planet? Well that's it in a nutshell. There's no callousness in this, only rationality - the long-term happiness of everyone is the aim. The solution for the Rohingya (the group in question) is to gain representation in their own country, not to move en masse to someone else's. That takes hard work and of course they should be helped, which is the purpose of the UN, UNESCO, IMF, Amnesty International etc. Helped, not looked after.
Western civilisation took centuries of disciplined effort and self-sacrifice to build up - civil wars, national wars, world wars, industrial revolutions, painstaking development of institutions and social systems, governance and education. Emerging nations have a long way to go but it is vital to rule out migration as an acceptable solution, otherwise there will be global upheaval as they try to skip the hard-work development phase, there will be the erosion of cultures and endless local conflict as pressure is suddenly put on limited resources - that will be bad news for everyone in the long-term.
The various organisations you refer to and NGO's in Myanmar have been lobbying the Myanmar authorities for years.
The Rohingya were officially made stateless & disenfranchised by the then dictatorship in Burma in 1982. The Rohingya situation has actually worsened with some international groups now warning there is a possibility the Myanmar authorities may descend into genocide.
Rohingya have been targeted by Islamist groups such as Al Qaeda and the Taliban to encourage them to take up arms against their oppressors; to be frank I'm surprised there has been very minimal activity by Rohingya is this respect in the past twenty years or so. Other ethnic groups (non-Muslim) in Myanmar have been active with armed resistance for years.
-
Will the father be forced to support this child according to Australian law.
The child & surrogate mother in Thailand are being supported by an Australian based charity.
In W.A. where the couple in the OP live it's actually illegal for an offshore surrogacy contract, although so far as I'm aware no Australian has ever been arrested and charged for the offense. As you probably know Thailand has now banned surrogacy for foreigners.
The whole scenario is bizarre as the Court in Oz has directed at no time can the 'father' be alone with the other child living in Oz, every three months the child must be informed why she cannot be alone with him and a person has been allocated by the extended family to live in the house to ensure the child is not alone with him.
-
The fear & terror in the faces of the girls in the video is heartbreaking.
Amnesty International says about 2,000 children have been abducted by Boko Haram since 2014. Many are used as sex slaves, fighters and even suicide bombers.
-
was just wondering why the IS dont round up all the rohinga littering various countries in SEA an ship them off to syria/iraq
That would be an interesting prospect. Being one of the most persecuted groups on earth, the Rohingyas would be ripe territory for recruitment. Many are desperately poor and the prospect of making money would be a real lure.
A number of Bangladeshi's have joined Islamist terror groups, but very limited activity by Rohingya in response to Taliban and Al Qaeda affiliated groups calls to rise up against their oppressors or to join them. Covered in fair amount of detail:
http://thediplomat.com/2015/06/the-rohingya-and-islamic-extremism-a-convenient-myth/
-
Not sure how Ghostnigel is ignorant or ill informed when he is 100% correct. Muslims illegally entering the UK are not subject to UK law or immigration laws. Once they manage to set foot on UK soil they are in for life and will be given full benefits for ever. I wish this was not the case, and that the law was applied to all regardless of status or religious beliefs, but let us deal with on the ground reality. By the way, a close friend is a channel tunnel employee and he tells me that almost all of them have 10k plus sterling in their pockets. Interesting how desperate "refugees" get such a thick wad.
He, and you, are both ignorant about and ill informed on this subject because what you are saying is 100% incorrect!
Everybody in the UK, regardless of their religion, is subject to the law of the land.
Anybody claiming any sort of public fund has to provide evidence that they are a British citizen or, if not, that they are in the UK legally and the conditions of their stay allows them to claim.
Therefore it should be obvious to all that illegal immigrants, whatever their religion, do not get any help from the state; because they are in the UK illegally and if they tried to obtain state aid then not only could they not provide such evidence, the mere attempt to claim would bring the attention of the state upon them and their illegal presence.
Of course, some people do enter illegally and then claim asylum, as do people who have entered legally, and so do get some state aid. The UK is a civilised country and wont let them starve.
But asylum seekers are not given a nice house and bucket loads of cash.
Some may be accommodated in a flat or house, many more are put into hostels or bed and breakfasts and a substantial proportion into an immigration detention centre or, if their asylum claim has been refused, even prison..
As well as being accommodated, they will also be given £35.39 a week with which to buy food and other necessities; plus a bit more, up to a maximum of £5 per week, if they are pregnant or have young children up to the age of 3. They may also get support from various charities, but that, of course, is not funded by the state.
So tell me; how does that add up to £18,600 p.a. as claimed by Ghostnigel? How does that equate to full benefits as claimed by you?
The latest government figures I can find show that between 2011 and 2013 45% of asylum claims were successful, 55% unsuccessful. So much for your claim that they are here for life. Initial figures for 2014 show a similar proportion.
For some facts rather than ignorant and ill informed opinion see
- Claim asylum in the UK
- Asylum support
- Asylum applicants' rights and responsibilities
- Immigration detention in the UK
- Home Office guidance; chapters 46 to 62: detention and removals.
Interesting that a channel tunnel worker is apparently able to stop and search illegal immigrants. Are the police and UKVI aware of his activities? Does he report these illegal immigrants to the police or UKVI so that they can be detained? Or does he simply let them through?
BTW, any support asylum seekers get from the government is means tested; so anyone with that amount of cash wont get anything.
My reply to your post keeps disappearing, you are either above criticism or there is a glitch in the system. For the last time, you are theoretically absolutely correct on every point. My point, and it is a major one, is that theory and on the ground actualities are in no way the same. You claim 55% of illegal immigrants are deported. With an estimated 3 million illegals in the UK(reality is probably far more) that would mean that approx 5,000 of them get deported every day, which would take about 14 jumbo jets daily - and is not happening I don't care what you tell me. I can only think of one muslim that was deported from the UK ever, that tool with a hook for a hand and it took about a decade and countless millions of quid and the locals in Finsbury park were whinging cos they loved him so much.. BTW recent arrivals in Germany (you know who im talking about) receive 370 Eu per month, as opposed to out of work professional Germans that get 390 Euros per month. Bit more than 30 quid a week that you claim.
I trust Mods will permit a reply?
The fairly consistent estimation of illegal migrants in the UK is approx 1 million. The vast majority of illegal migrants from countries that require a visa to enter the UK are over stayers. It is claimed the majority of over stayers by way of nationality are Chinese and Indians. Generally deportation of over stayers, not meeting visa conditions and declined asylum applicants is under reported. e.g. 50k students deported for not complying to their visa conditions.
https://thepienews.com/news/uk-to-investigate-deportation-of-50k-international-students/
The complication for deporting, those reaching the legal benchmark for criminal / terrorism offences after serving their jail sentence. declined asylum seekers and so on is HMG must have in-place government to government agreements for returnees; this fact has been repeated on a number of occasions and repeatedly ignored by some posters. In addition home countries for deportees must be declared 'safe' by HMG, as was recently announced for Afghan deportees.
When comparing welfare rates, which is definitely off topic, a bit more accuracy should be utilised.
"first year of unemployment remains covered by unemployment pay. Those who were in paid employment for at least a year beforehand still receive 60% of their net salary for the first year and 67% if they provide for a family. The big drop now happens afterwards. Instead of receiving about half of their former salaries, single people currently get €391 a month".
More detail at:
-
The guardian piece was a perfect example of first last reporting. They emphasized all the supposed positive bits and washed over the inconvenient bits left to the end. Also the quite devastating conclusions Trevor Phillips reached were glossed over or omitted. Little wonder really as the guardian and independent have so much invested in the failed multicultural ideology.The poll results to which Trevor Phillips refers is covered at the URL below.
7x7 I would be interested to read your thoughts / opinions regards his Channel 4 broadcast - perhaps in the Bedlam forum - thanks.
Perhaps you should both save yourself the bother of watching and just wait for Loonwatch to do a hit piece on Mr Phillips.
IMO you have a particular political prism upon which you and others view media reporting, much of which spins every single incident of criminality and other crimes, and infers all Muslims are this or that. As the poll demonstrates this is not the case. The high level of analysis of the poll demonstrates targeting particular socio economic demographic groups and concentration on so called disadvantaged locations, not the general Muslim heritage community of the UK.
http://metro.co.uk/2016/04/12/heres-what-you-really-need-to-know-about-british-muslims-5811220/
Numerous polls of Muslim opinion are carried out, those that do not support the tabloid / alarmist generalist view of the Muslim community are constantly denigrated by certain members of this forum.
The never ending attacks against 7x7 on this forum and others when they provide supporting links for their posts, to me, smack of desperation to find the minutest bit of criticism to support the overwhelming bigotry against all Muslims.
I do note you personally occasionally try to provide a bit of balance in some of your posts, but often revert to type.
BTW both the Guardian and the Independent have articles that are heavily critical of aspects of Islamic society e.g.
-
What Germans do in Germany is not the business of Turkey.
The German government should know that an protect their citizens
Perhaps it's illegal in Germany to accuse people of having sex with children and animals?
Although I would have thought it's a civil matter rather than a criminal one.
In this case possibly a criminal matter, from the OP...
"German law forbids insults of organs or representatives of foreign states, prosecutors are examining whether criminal proceedings can be brought"
-
as far as i know this type of thing a war crime"CIA director says would refuse to torture even if ordered" he doesnt however have and qualms about obliterating whole villages full of innocent people using unmanned aerial drones
Does that mean something like he has no problem in blowing away those who harbour, hide, feed and support terrorists ?
Definitions of War Crimes:
-
The poll results to which Trevor Phillips refers is covered at the URL below.
7x7 I would be interested to read your thoughts / opinions regards his Channel 4 broadcast - perhaps in the Bedlam forum - thanks.
-
Only uneducated, low information, racist, hateful bigots would believe that this isn't secular and modern and liberal. Women's rights groups should follow this example. This is cultural enrichment at its finest.
deleted
-
No but if the child is an Australian citizen living in Thailand the Aus govt could seize any Aus assets on behalf of the child?
Don't know
-
You might find some useful information in the following link:
Irrelevant to the question raised by Kenny202 as Australia / Thailand currently do not have a
reciprocating jurisdiction agreement for child support.
Thailand scuppers migrant rescue ship's operations
in Thailand News
Posted
Members who post support for crimes against humanity are scum. For reasons unknown to me TV management permit repeated breach of forum rules by people such as you apparently without consequence. IMO you and others who have similar posting records damage the TV brand and should be banned.