Germany, France, Britain press for EU action on migrants

[manarak]

If you read the UNHCR report I linked to earlier, you will know that the vast majority of refugees are either still in their home country or in neighbouring ones.

Although the numbers already in Europe, and those still coming, are high, they are a fraction of the total.

so, why can't that fraction stay with the majority?

Too miserable.

I take it you mean the majority is too miserable, because the boat people have to pay quite a price to cross the mediterranean

[simple1]

I don't understand the apparant half assed approach against ISIS.

If Europe got together and roiled them up, a secular state could be set up where the refugees could return

What's the problem. Is a Great Game" being played out?

Maybe we should apply some colonial ideas. Give Libya to Italy. Let them set up a client state there

Just a thought?

You could say there is a version of the 'Great Game' at play in the M.E. region based upon Sunni / Shiite ambitions. Daesh leadership has made it clear one of their objectives, aside from the Islamic vision for the Apocalypse, is the reversal of the Sykes- Picot Agreement. At this stage outside nations and regional balance of power players are unable to agree mutually acceptable government / politicians to rule territory regained from Daesh within Syria, even for some areas of recaptured territory in Iraq.

There has been talk of safety buffer zones for housing refugees within Syria along the borders of Turkey - Syria and Jordan - Syria, but to date no final agreement on roles and responsibilities, can't even agree on no fly zones to stop the Syrian Air Force massacring civilians.

Right now EU countries officially only have an allocation of 32,256 places for resettlement of refugees arriving in Italy & Greece. NATO countries have long held themselves as beacons of aspiration & justice for all; under pressure of mass 'migration' the ideals are quickly crumbling, though Germany is working hard to keep the dream alive.

http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2015/jul/21/eu-member-states-miss-target-to-relocate-40000-migrants

UNHCR is significantly under funded and under resourced that has led to massive delays in processing refugee claims in some host countries e.g. Turkey (estimated 1.8 million refugees) currently an eight year wait time for UNHCR interview for assessment. Hopefully UN donor countries will increase & accelerate their funding allocations.

The source countries have very corrupt government, oppression against all opposition, failed State (e.g. Libya & Somalia) and of course compounded by killing fields such as Syria and Iraq. It is self evident that after the breakup of the colonial empires, Western nations have mainly failed in their policy efforts to influence acceptable governance practices in the source countries.

[Humphrey Bear]

As I have stated many times in other threads - when I was born in 1937 I was one of the 2 billion then alive on Planet Earth. That 2 billion were as many as all the people who had lived on the Earth from the first man until that time.

Now there are 7.5 billion people alive on this planet. It is far too many. A sustainable population would be less than half of what we now have. We need to cull the existing population and limit any potential for growth in the future.

The migration problem will only get worse until some drastic action is taken - look at Bangladesh for instance - a population of just over 70 million when it declared independence in the 1970s, now a population of 184 million, plus the millions who have migrated. And little or no resources in the place - only people.

[cookee68]

I don't know why you equate any pragmatic thinking with putting people in death camps?

I made my proposal already, i.e. use UN military means to establish protectorates where refugees could live and work under UN protection

Protectorates where? In your back yard? Are there some nice rolling tree-dotted green hills somewhere where we can start a village of, let's say, 45,000 destitute people? They'll need water, electricity, roads, garbage collection, cops, schools, living quarters, jobs, and offices they can go to - to apply for welfare pay-outs. Do you know of several nice areas like that in Europe with vacancies for hundreds of thousands of destitute people to reside?

Best to make the areas close to where the refugees come from:

Northern Irak

Somalia

Mali

If you read the UNHCR report I linked to earlier, you will know that the vast majority of refugees are either still in their home country or in neighbouring ones.

Although the numbers already in Europe, and those still coming, are high, they are a fraction of the total.

Yes but most of those coming are not refugees, and are in no danger at all, and they are the ones that hinder the true entering

[boomerangutang]

If you read the UNHCR report I linked to earlier, you will know that the vast majority of refugees are either still in their home country or in neighbouring ones.

Although the numbers already in Europe, and those still coming, are high, they are a fraction of the total.

so, why can't that fraction stay with the majority?

Too miserable.

I take it you mean the majority is too miserable, because the boat people have to pay quite a price to cross the mediterranean

They're all miserable - to one degree or another. That's why, each day I like to watch some Youtube videos with uplifting themes. For example: people who are enjoying what they do, who are endeavoring to make their community better for everyone, etc. It's a stark relief from the bleak refugee news. And the migrant thing is only going to get digressively worse, week by week. Now it's summer. Wait 'til next winter, when there are a million people with their faces pressed up against steel walls topped with razor wire, facing soldiers with guns, and the teeming masses with their kids have no water, no food, tattered clothes, snow falling, mud up above their ankles. I hate to say it but, YOU AIN'T SEEN NOTHIN' YET !!!

[boomerangutang]

Food for thought: There's a short story by (in my opinion) the world's best sci-fi writer, LARRY NIVEN. It's called 'Bordered in Black' written in 1966. Here's a synopsis:

A prototype faster-than-light spacecraft crewed by two men is sent to the Sirius system, known from robotic exploration to include an earthlike world. In orbit around the world, they notice that one of the continents has a thin, strange border all the way round its coastline, which radiates a low heat. After exploring the edges of the smaller continents, discovering that the ocean hosts only one lifeform -- a single species of algae that they think might have been genetically engineered -- they decide to explore the large continent with the border.

When they discover just what the black border is -- a seething mass of trapped humans feeding off the algae and each other -- the result is the death, by suicide, of one of the crew, and the self-destruction of the ship by the traumatized survivor just before he is rescued when he makes it back to Earth - and a chilling reminder that there may be great danger waiting for further human explorers. The story, however, ends on a hopeful note, with the project leader believing that Earth can help the humans at Sirius, and a fearful one, with the crewman then speculating that the humans were seeded by carnivorous aliens as food animals.

[simple1]

If you read the UNHCR report I linked to earlier, you will know that the vast majority of refugees are either still in their home country or in neighbouring ones.

Although the numbers already in Europe, and those still coming, are high, they are a fraction of the total.

Yes but most of those coming are not refugees, and are in no danger at all, and they are the ones that hinder the true entering

Do you have the stats to support your claim?

The conflicts raging in Syria and Afghanistan, and abuses in Eritrea, are major drivers of the migration.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-24583286

[manarak]

If you read the UNHCR report I linked to earlier, you will know that the vast majority of refugees are either still in their home country or in neighbouring ones.

Although the numbers already in Europe, and those still coming, are high, they are a fraction of the total.

Yes but most of those coming are not refugees, and are in no danger at all, and they are the ones that hinder the true entering

Do you have the stats to support your claim?

The conflicts raging in Syria and Afghanistan, and abuses in Eritrea, are major drivers of the migration.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-24583286

What you said in your posts is true, yet you stay far too descriptive. What I would like to hear from you is what's your opinion on what should be done?

[simple1]

If you read the UNHCR report I linked to earlier, you will know that the vast majority of refugees are either still in their home country or in neighbouring ones.

Although the numbers already in Europe, and those still coming, are high, they are a fraction of the total.

Yes but most of those coming are not refugees, and are in no danger at all, and they are the ones that hinder the true entering

Do you have the stats to support your claim?

The conflicts raging in Syria and Afghanistan, and abuses in Eritrea, are major drivers of the migration.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-24583286

What you said in your posts is true, yet you stay far too descriptive. What I would like to hear from you is what's your opinion on what should be done?

So far use of military force has failed, though I do believe the likes of truly evil proxies such as Daesh must be destroyed. Ultimately push factors in conflicts zones such as Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan can only be finally resolved by political means by the regional balance of power players. The means of actually achieving a political resolution, supported by military power, in a very corrupt environment is way beyond my knowledge. Perhaps, for the medium term future, outcome is predicated upon re-aligning borders along the Sunni / Shiite divide, as forecast by some highly influential strategic think tanks.

Regards the push factor in the African continent of Islamic extremism can be addressed by use of invited military forces, Mali comes to mind. In addition to re-visit the endemic corruption & causal poverty by government policies to have a look at some form of a Marshall plan, would probably be a lot more cost effective in the longer term than sitting on the side lines.

In the meantime EU nations must put aside their individual nationalistic agendas & come up with a coordinated approach to address the current challenge of 'mass migration' - yes I know - quite idealistic...

Edited September 3, 2015 by simple1

[TommyUK1960]

It is totally irresponsible for the E.U to keep taking Muslims in. Its going to lead to civil war down the road.

These Muslim refugees need to go to Muslim countries for safe haven.

The so called migrants interviewed in Calia were bragging they have money and I never see any women.

Something is so wrong as they have already come across safe countries yet still want to enter the UK.

[simple1]

Yes but most of those coming are not refugees, and are in no danger at all, and they are the ones that hinder the true entering

Do you have the stats to support your claim?

The conflicts raging in Syria and Afghanistan, and abuses in Eritrea, are major drivers of the migration.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-24583286

What you said in your posts is true, yet you stay far too descriptive. What I would like to hear from you is what's your opinion on what should be done?

So far use of military force has failed, though I do believe the likes of truly evil proxies such as Daesh must be destroyed. Ultimately push factors in conflicts zones such as Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan can only be finally resolved by political means by the regional balance of power players. The means of actually achieving a political resolution, supported by military power, in a very corrupt environment is way beyond my knowledge. Perhaps, for the medium term future, outcome is predicated upon re-aligning borders along the Sunni / Shiite divide, as forecast by some highly influential strategic think tanks.

Regards the push factor in the African continent of Islamic extremism can be addressed by use of invited military forces, Mali comes to mind. In addition to re-visit the endemic corruption & causal poverty by government policies to have a look at some form of a Marshall plan, would probably be a lot more cost effective in the longer term than sitting on the side lines.

In the meantime EU nations must put aside their individual nationalistic agendas & come up with a coordinated approach to address the current challenge of 'mass migration' - yes I know - quite idealistic...

Post removed to enable reply.

To add:

Tonight I watched a TV interview with a senior UNHCR representative. She was saying that right now countries bordering Syria are hosting 4 million Syrian refugees after nearly five years of a war, with currently no end in sight. This financial year, with four months to go, UNHCR has only received 37% of the required budget to support the refugees in the host countries. Accordingly support services have been curtailed; this is creating the additional push factor that has led to the huge increase in those seeking a better environment in Europe for those who have enough money left to travel before the coming winter.

[7by7]

(Some nested quotes removed for clarity.

If you read the UNHCR report I linked to earlier, you will know that the vast majority of refugees are either still in their home country or in neighbouring ones.

Although the numbers already in Europe, and those still coming, are high, they are a fraction of the total.

so, why can't that fraction stay with the majority?

Because they have the means to try and escape from the misery of the refugee camps in those countries an try for what they see as a better life in Europe.

Even if it means selling everything they own to the people traffickers.

Just as people fleeing the Czarist and later Soviet pogroms and the Nazis did before them.

If you were in their position would you stay in conditions like this

or if able to do so, would you try for a better life in Europe?

[7by7]

It is totally irresponsible for the E.U to keep taking Muslims in. Its going to lead to civil war down the road.

These Muslim refugees need to go to Muslim countries for safe haven.

The so called migrants interviewed in Calia were bragging they have money and I never see any women.

Something is so wrong as they have already come across safe countries yet still want to enter the UK.

You must have missed reports like Shocking images of drowned Syrian boy show tragic plight of refugees

The UK is far from being the most popular destination for either refugees or economic migrants.

10 truths about Europe’s migrant crisis

If you read the British press, you’d think that Calais was the major battleground of the European migrant crisis, and that Britain was the holy grail of its protagonists. In reality, the migrants at Calais account for as little as 1% of those who have arrived in Europe so far this year.......

Contrary to the perception of the UK as the high altar of immigration, it is not a particularly major magnet for refugees. In 2014, just 25,870 people sought asylum in the UK, and only 10,050 were accepted. Germany (97275), France (68500), Sweden (39,905) and Italy (35,180) were all far more affected. When the ratings are calculated as a proportion to population size, the UK slips even further down the table – behind Belgium, Holland and Austria. If the ratings were calculated on 2015 rates, then even impoverished Greece would rise above the UK in the table. Just as tellingly, the UK has welcomed just 187 Syrians through legal mechanisms at the last count. Turkey has around 1.6 million.

[Scott]

It might be a good time for some of the EU money to head in the direction of the UNHCR or they might want to start funding some of their NGO's to provide services in and near the camps in the ME.

I remember working in the former Yugoslavia and there were NGO's tripping over each other to help. The same was true in Iraq.

[TommyUK1960]

It is totally irresponsible for the E.U to keep taking Muslims in. Its going to lead to civil war down the road.

These Muslim refugees need to go to Muslim countries for safe haven.

The so called migrants interviewed in Calia were bragging they have money and I never see any women.

Something is so wrong as they have already come across safe countries yet still want to enter the UK.

You must have missed reports like Shocking images of drowned Syrian boy show tragic plight of refugees

The UK is far from being the most popular destination for either refugees or economic migrants.

10 truths about Europe’s migrant crisis

If you read the British press, you’d think that Calais was the major battleground of the European migrant crisis, and that Britain was the holy grail of its protagonists. In reality, the migrants at Calais account for as little as 1% of those who have arrived in Europe so far this year.......

Contrary to the perception of the UK as the high altar of immigration, it is not a particularly major magnet for refugees. In 2014, just 25,870 people sought asylum in the UK, and only 10,050 were accepted. Germany (97275), France (68500), Sweden (39,905) and Italy (35,180) were all far more affected. When the ratings are calculated as a proportion to population size, the UK slips even further down the table – behind Belgium, Holland and Austria. If the ratings were calculated on 2015 rates, then even impoverished Greece would rise above the UK in the table. Just as tellingly, the UK has welcomed just 187 Syrians through legal mechanisms at the last count. Turkey has around 1.6 million.

I didn't miss this sad image, I read that they wanted to make their way to Canada. Seems a bit of a strange route via Europe. Even so, If Europe had not been so welcoming of these migrants before then we would not be seeing the mass's now making their way to Europe. My question is why aren't rich Muslim states looking after them and giving them free housing, welfare and all the rest they get in Europe? I am sick and tired of lefties ramming multiculturalism down my throat and governments that have put foreigners before British people first.

[manarak]

(Some nested quotes removed for clarity.

If you read the UNHCR report I linked to earlier, you will know that the vast majority of refugees are either still in their home country or in neighbouring ones.

Although the numbers already in Europe, and those still coming, are high, they are a fraction of the total.

so, why can't that fraction stay with the majority?

Because they have the means to try and escape from the misery of the refugee camps in those countries an try for what they see as a better life in Europe.

Even if it means selling everything they own to the people traffickers.

Just as people fleeing the Czarist and later Soviet pogroms and the Nazis did before them.

If you were in their position would you stay in conditions like this

or if able to do so, would you try for a better life in Europe?

I'm sure they chose the nicest spot in the camp to shoot that photo, the nicest weather too.

The conditions in the camps certainly aren't nice, but the photo tells absolutely no story.

[brain150]

It might be a good idea for Israel to throw bombs at Palestine !

It might also be a good idea for Britain and the US to stop funding IS !

It might also be a good idea to stop drone attaks [... all from the US] to kill people all around the world !

It might also be a good idea to stop selling weapons to each and every terrorist on the planet !!!

It might also be a good idea for the european countries to stop dumping their garbage [chemical, nuclear and others] in africa !

Maybe it would even be a good idea for all these insane countries [uSA, UK, France, Germany] to think bombing countries creates peace !!!

... that's the reasons why all these people leave their countries !!!

The West has seeded and now they harvest !

This will lead into a full blown desaster and it is very obviously in the interest of some insane politicians like Merkel, Obama and all socalled "leaders" !

Welcome to the brave new world ! Governments creating a new population as the old ones were not easy enough to handle !

[brain150]

(Some nested quotes removed for clarity.

If you read the UNHCR report I linked to earlier, you will know that the vast majority of refugees are either still in their home country or in neighbouring ones.

Although the numbers already in Europe, and those still coming, are high, they are a fraction of the total.

so, why can't that fraction stay with the majority?

Because they have the means to try and escape from the misery of the refugee camps in those countries an try for what they see as a better life in Europe.

Even if it means selling everything they own to the people traffickers.

Just as people fleeing the Czarist and later Soviet pogroms and the Nazis did before them.

If you were in their position would you stay in conditions like this

or if able to do so, would you try for a better life in Europe?

I'm sure they chose the nicest spot in the camp to shoot that photo, the nicest weather too.

The conditions in the camps certainly aren't nice, but the photo tells absolutely no story.

That's a typical propaganda photo !

It works all the time ... remember the fake story about the babies before the iraqi war ?

Playing with the human empathy is a mighty propaganda weapon !!!

... about 90% of the "refugees" at the moment are male between 18 and 35 !!!

[7by7]

(Some nested quotes removed for clarity.

If you read the UNHCR report I linked to earlier, you will know that the vast majority of refugees are either still in their home country or in neighbouring ones.

Although the numbers already in Europe, and those still coming, are high, they are a fraction of the total.

so, why can't that fraction stay with the majority?

Because they have the means to try and escape from the misery of the refugee camps in those countries an try for what they see as a better life in Europe.

Even if it means selling everything they own to the people traffickers.

Just as people fleeing the Czarist and later Soviet pogroms and the Nazis did before them.

If you were in their position would you stay in conditions like this

or if able to do so, would you try for a better life in Europe?

I'm sure they chose the nicest spot in the camp to shoot that photo, the nicest weather too.

The conditions in the camps certainly aren't nice, but the photo tells absolutely no story.

For sure, it doesn't rain all the time, but, whether an official camp or an unofficial one; Butlins it aint!

But you didn't answer the question; will you now do so?

[7by7]

(Nested quotes removed to comply with forum software)

That's (UNHCR camp photo) a typical propaganda photo !

It works all the time ... remember the fake story about the babies before the iraqi war ?

Playing with the human empathy is a mighty propaganda weapon !!!

... about 90% of the "refugees" at the moment are male between 18 and 35 !!!

There are plenty of similar photos and reports of conditions in the camps from verifiable, independent sources.

Your 90% are male between 18 and 35 so called fact is wrong; do some research. Look at, for example, the reports and photos of the refugees at Budapest Station.

[manarak]

But you didn't answer the question; will you now do so?

It's difficult to tell without knowing the exact situation and which access to information I have and which means I have at my disposal...

I guess everything is possible depending on the former.

Without going to a camp myself I will not be able to answer your question.

[Typingdog]

And later.. the EU press for SWEDEN to take all those asylum people in!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[7by7]

But you didn't answer the question; will you now do so?

It's difficult to tell without knowing the exact situation and which access to information I have and which means I have at my disposal...

I guess everything is possible depending on the former.

Without going to a camp myself I will not be able to answer your question.

It is, of course, difficult to put oneself in the position of these poor wretches.

But I cannot understand why anyone would condemn someone who is in one of those camps, and has the means with which to try for a better life for themselves and their children elsewhere for so doing.

After all, the example of the Palestinian refugees, many of whom have lived in refugee camps since 1967, even 1948, had children born there, had grandchildren born there, easily gives the impression that one day being able to return home is a forlorn hope.

[manarak]

But you didn't answer the question; will you now do so?

It's difficult to tell without knowing the exact situation and which access to information I have and which means I have at my disposal...

I guess everything is possible depending on the former.

Without going to a camp myself I will not be able to answer your question.

It is, of course, difficult to put oneself in the position of these poor wretches.

But I cannot understand why anyone would condemn someone who is in one of those camps, and has the means with which to try for a better life for themselves and their children elsewhere for so doing.

After all, the example of the Palestinian refugees, many of whom have lived in refugee camps since 1967, even 1948, had children born there, had grandchildren born there, easily gives the impression that one day being able to return home is a forlorn hope.

I don't condemn them.

The world is full of people in bad situations which aren't of their doing.

However, the general expectation cannot be that foreign countries should welcome all people who chose to flee from a bad (but not lifethreatening) situation, acoomodate then, feed them, etc.

Furthermore, a camp is a place where the life of the refugees is not threatened.

So, refugees who instead of staying in a camp chose to try their luck elsewhere have to be considered economic migrants.

Another thought I have is that they know what they are doing is illegal - so it seems those who reach europe are those who have a higher criminal energy than those who stay in camps. I also wonder how many crimes are committed to scrape together the money needed to pay the smugglers.

In connection with the above is also the fact that 90% are single males, many probably have family which they choose to abandon, and they take with them all money too to pay for the smugglers.

A new kind of "single male traveler" !

Edited September 4, 2015 by manarak

[simple1]

But you didn't answer the question; will you now do so?

It's difficult to tell without knowing the exact situation and which access to information I have and which means I have at my disposal...

I guess everything is possible depending on the former.

Without going to a camp myself I will not be able to answer your question.

It is, of course, difficult to put oneself in the position of these poor wretches.

But I cannot understand why anyone would condemn someone who is in one of those camps, and has the means with which to try for a better life for themselves and their children elsewhere for so doing.

After all, the example of the Palestinian refugees, many of whom have lived in refugee camps since 1967, even 1948, had children born there, had grandchildren born there, easily gives the impression that one day being able to return home is a forlorn hope.

<Snip>

In connection with the above is also the fact that 90% are single males, many probably have family which they choose to abandon, and they take with them all money too to pay for the smugglers.

A new kind of "single male traveler" !

Where do you get the 'fact' that 90% are single males? In any case I would take it as a fact young men traveling alone are seeking to reach EU in order to be able to support their families, not abandoning their families. From an EU report...

The distribution of asylum applicants by sex shows that men were more likely than women to seek asylum. Across the EU-28, the gender distribution was most balanced for asylum applicants aged less than 14, where boys accounted for 53 % of the total number of applications in 2014. There was a greater degree of gender inequality for asylum applicants aged 14–17 or 18–34, where around three quarters of applicants were male. Female applicants outnumbered male applicants for asylum seekers aged 65 and over, although this group was relatively small, accounting for just 0.8 % of the total number of applications in 2014.

More detail at:

http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/Asylum_statistics

So far as funding for travel from the camps, UNHCR (who are on the ground & more knowledgeable than you) state that the dramatic up kick in travel movement this year is due to the reduction in services due to insufficient funds and the loss of hope the war will end anytime soon. The funds being used by the refugees are what's left of their rapidly dwindling savings, being used to supplement UNHCR & NGOs care services. Also remember the vast majority of the children are not receiving any education, already the illiteracy rates have dramatically risen, this issue is also quoted by UNHCR as a contributing push factor.

It's unfortunate people are casting slurs at the disenfranchised, accusing them of being criminals, ripping off their families and so on.

Edited September 4, 2015 by simple1

[7by7]

Manarak,

First you say that you do not condemn them, then you call them criminals who have abandoned their families, taking all the families money with them!

You also repeat the 'fact' that 90% of them are young, single males.

Have you looked at the news reports from, for example, Budapest?

Were you to do so you would see that a significant proportion are women and children!

It is true that there are young, single males among the refugees; and doubtless some of those are not refugees, but economic migrants; those from Bangladesh for example.

But that does not mean they all are.

If a family only has enough money for one member to travel to Europe, who would it be better to send?

A granny or a child; or a young man who has a chance of finding work once in Europe and be able to send for their family once established and support them once they are reunited?

[Usernames]

Manarak,

First you say that you do not condemn them, then you call them criminals who have abandoned their families, taking all the families money with them!

You also repeat the 'fact' that 90% of them are young, single males.

Have you looked at the news reports from, for example, Budapest?

Were you to do so you would see that a significant proportion are women and children!

It is true that there are young, single males among the refugees; and doubtless some of those are not refugees, but economic migrants; those from Bangladesh for example.

But that does not mean they all are.

If a family only has enough money for one member to travel to Europe, who would it be better to send?

A granny or a child; or a young man who has a chance of finding work once in Europe and be able to send for their family once established and support them once they are reunited?

The "news reports" from Budapest on CNN are given by Arwa Damon who is Syrian, who has a past as a refugee, and who, by the way, is a notoriously violent out of control drunk. http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/cnn-arwa-damon-bit-medics-drunken-rage-u-s-embassy-baghdad-lawsuit-article-1.1891449

[7by7]

Which proves what?

I haven't seen any CNN reports, but have seen reports from the BBC, ITN and Sky News in the UK, as well as those in the print media.

Picture from the BBC report Migrants arrive in Austria after Hungary provides buses

[Usernames]

Which proves what?

I haven't seen any CNN reports, but have seen reports from the BBC, ITN and Sky News in the UK, as well as those in the print media.

Picture from the BBC report Migrants arrive in Austria after Hungary provides buses

It PROVES a fundamental conflict of interest, usually resulting in a reporter recusing himself/herself from the assignment. It is called BASIC journalistic ethics.

[7by7]

Whatever your views of one reporter working for one media outlet, what it does not prove is that the pictures of the women and children refugees are, as you are implying, fake!

Unless you are so delusional that you believe all media to be as biased as you believe this one reporter to be!