Merkel warns asylum seekers that German refuge is 'temporary'

[sawadee1947]

Though I'm not German it's amazing what Germany did to help those who asked for asylum. UK took not even 500 refugees whereas Germany granted shelter to more than 1000000. Shame on all other countries refusing to fulfill humanitarian duty. Including my Irish countrymen.

For your biased information the UK is taking in 20,000 Migrants/refugees. Do try and get some semblance of your facts right, the UK is only a small Island,and we have many immigration problems of our own,the world owes nobody a living !

I think you are wrong. According to what is publishe...it's just a little more than 200. Not 20.000. See my quote to "lostmebike". There you found my sources. Guardian aso... But probably you got "insider" information we don't know

[sawadee1947]

A million+ to Germany, 100's of thousands to most eu countries...... How many to each of the Arab countries, Russian-affiliated countries, to India, Africa, etc?

well, it's easy to point to others, isn't it?

[stoneyboy]

A million+ to Germany, 100's of thousands to most eu countries...... How many to each of the Arab countries, Russian-affiliated countries, to India, Africa, etc?

well, it's easy to point to others, isn't it?

Your still trolling then ?

[Scott]

An off-topic post has been removed. Please ignore trolls.

The topic is about Germany.

[manarak]

And for those who opposed the Assad regime will go where if Assad is still in power?

I think Ms. Merkel is getting mixed up between what constitutes a refugee/Asylum seeker and what a displaced person is. People who cannot return to their home country because of a well-founded fear of persecution are refugees. Those who have left because it is a war zone, but who can return once the area is safe are displaced people.

Good point that illustrates well that sending them back won't be as straightforward as Merkel wants everyone to believe.

[sawadee1947]

I think you will find your facts are completely incorrect.

The UK is taking "mothers with children" and it is going direct to the source and accepting them from refugee camps in Lebanon and Turkey.

You are factually incorrect on a second point. The overwhelming majority of migrants are unaccompanied young men not from Syria. Upon registration they claim to be 17 or 16 but many are in their twenties. This entitles them to priority housing and social worker care as they are classed as unaccompanied children. It also allows them to immediately apply for their relatives to be flown over to join them.

I don't think for a moment that I will change your simplistic and naive thinking. However I do believe thinking like yours has greatly helped create a $4billion a year people trafficking industry, enriching organised criminals beyond anything imaginable and massively increasing the drownings, other deaths and exploitation of those who believe the sales pitch of these traffickers.

Actually you will not see the reality: ALL your so called facts are wrong! You are right almost 60% of the refugees are men. Indeed. But what about the rest of 300000 to 400000 (Germany)?

Look I can't change your mind nor your brain. And I'm not responsible for your education. You know by yourself that there is a big lack of everything. But I hope you can read. I give you 3 sources to read and then ask you to shut up. To take 216 refugees within ONE year IS A SHAME. No doubt about it.

1. https://www.amnesty.org.uk/actions/bring-refugee-families-back-together-asylum-uk-reunion

2. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/sep/02/how-many-refugees-should-britain-take-middle-east-syria- migrants

3. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/sep/02/refugees-welcome-uk-germany-compare-migration

Yes sure. Read the pc liberal left wing media and NGO's reports - they wouldn't lie would they? And ignore the fact your own country is doing f/all and don't comment on that.

Try to understand that reading from sources that support your view, your agenda and fuel your bigotry isn't actually research. Nor is a biased bigoted brain likely to pursue a balanced understanding.

Sweden and Germany are now rapidly back tracking - why do you think that is? I'd suggest a much higher proportion are unaccompanied men than you want to believe; and that many are not refugees but illegal immigrants hoping to get in under the radar and checks.

Presumably from your comments you expect all EU countries to simply open their borders and make benefits available to any who want them? The Swedish and German people have made it clear to their politicians they won't put up with such lunacy.

Sweden and Germany are now rapidly back tracking - why do you think that is? I'd suggest a much higher proportion are unaccompanied men than you want to believe

70% is published by German govt. And if ALL EU countries would be responsible as Sweden or Germany (which you mentioned) there would be no problems. But a country similar size as Germany takes only 216 refugees within one year?

And don;t forget....it's only for 3 years. (only If they are qualified maybe longer)

Here a German govt. website. Even without knowledge of German language you can see where the refugees are coming from. (and their age and gender)

http://www.spiegel.de/politik/deutschland/fluechtlinge-und-einwanderer-die-wichtigsten-fakten-a-1030320.html#sponfakt=3

Of course there are more young men than women. The reason is that the families don't have enough money to pay for all members. So they send the young man. If he comes through they might follow. Also the young men don't want to fight for Assad (what they would have to do if they stay in Syria)

I ask you to go much deeper into the refugee matter than you do. Or...keep quiet.

But if you need more detailed information you might contact me.

[jpinx]

The politicians absolutley love this situation, they all get to quote numbers that are totally unverifiable to make their political solution look better. It's very noticeable that there is little attempt to actually send the manpower required to man the borders of EU and stop the problem. some say 70% are military age single men -- anyone hear the alarm bells ... or is that the dinner bell....?

[sawadee1947]

And for those who opposed the Assad regime will go where if Assad is still in power?

I think Ms. Merkel is getting mixed up between what constitutes a refugee/Asylum seeker and what a displaced person is. People who cannot return to their home country because of a well-founded fear of persecution are refugees. Those who have left because it is a war zone, but who can return once the area is safe are displaced people.

Good point that illustrates well that sending them back won't be as straightforward as Merkel wants everyone to believe.

Nonsense: according to Geneva Convention they can stay in our countries at least 3 years. After the war is over in Syria (what might be within this period) they have to leave and go back to Syria.

And...everybody who escapes bombs and terror is a refugee. Displaced people are different: those who flee flooding e.g. Or is there any war in Britain? Or terror? It was not reported in BBC yet.

[bangon04]

And for those who opposed the Assad regime will go where if Assad is still in power?

I think Ms. Merkel is getting mixed up between what constitutes a refugee/Asylum seeker and what a displaced person is. People who cannot return to their home country because of a well-founded fear of persecution are refugees. Those who have left because it is a war zone, but who can return once the area is safe are displaced people.

and the vast majority are economic migrants, who have absolutely no intention of going home.....

[jpinx]

There's a lot of apples and pears being compared. The figures issued by the different agencies in different countries are counted by different criteria

[stoneyboy]

so you think that UK is entitled to step on Genever Convention and close the border for refugees? Humanity doesn't count? (do you think a border will help? How long your so called empire existed? And why it was eradicated?)

Stupidity of the UK? How?

I think with recent events in Sweden and Germany, the UK has acted spot on.

Some may say Sweden and Germany are the foolish ones.

The British Empire lasted than the Thousand Year Reich - and did a lot more for humanity than a barbarous murderous Nazi regime.

And what has Ireland done - kept quiet whilst thankful of the British handouts that kept them out of becoming another Greece.

What have all those rich Arab states done? They have plenty of land, plenty of cash and are even the same religion and closer cultures?

Me thinks you are more interested in displaying your bigotry and hatred to the UK than any welfare or humanity towards genuine refugees.

this is a useless anwer: don't count what the Empire did...how many people were slaughtered....and don't compare with those killed by Nazis. (Anyway your relationship to Nazi-germany is evident. Where Prince Philipp came from???)

This is not the point here.

Also Ireland is quite lucky to get support by EU. Sure. And it was lucky to be the first and not the last during the crash. Sure.

Concerning the Arab states the situation is more difficult than you describe: There are Shiites and Sunnies and also Alevites. E.g SaudiArabia is a Sunni country. And in Syria we have 10% Christians and 20% Shiites. You are right they could take some more refugees, but don't forget not even half of the population in SaudiArabia are Saudis! That is the real reason why they say NO.

And so we are again in EU and and the role UK is playing. It is for sure a wealthy country and able to host a lot more than 200 refugees.

That is the point, man!

You really don't know what your on about old Philly boy is a bubble and squeak me old China plate.

[CharlieH]

Post with personal remarks have been removed.

Discuss the topic NOT the poster. Thank you.

[Andreas2]

[manarak]

I wonder if in the refugee/asylum process there is at some point a decision made on whether the asylum seekers are good people or bad people?

Once the war is over in Syria and ISIS crushed, could we see an influx of salafist asylum seekers claiming persecution ?

[Scott]

More posts removed along with replies.

Please don't respond to trolls. Also, this thread is about Germany.

[jpinx]

I wonder if in the refugee/asylum process there is at some point a decision made on whether the asylum seekers are good people or bad people?

Once the war is over in Syria and ISIS crushed, could we see an influx of salafist asylum seekers claiming persecution ?

Of course. There are always persecuted people in every country, but this situation has been blown out of proportion and every "hanger-on" imaginable (and some not) have been making full use of Merkel's ill-advised welcome. So easy to allow people in, but it's going to be a nightmare to send any back, assuming the authorities can correctly identity the country to send them to, and that country agrees to take the returnees. That's after the "due process" and the rich lawyers getting their hands into the publicly funded defence appeals against deportation. It's a huge gravy train. The guy making money out of his inflatable domes to house refugees is the tip of the iceberg.

Meantime - Germany has such a poor military they can not even support their own aircraft properly to assist with anything on the ground. It is very noticeable the the europeans nations rely heavily on French and Dutch contingents for their "boots on the ground". The mighty wealth of Germany doesn't stretch as far as a decent military force.

[Steely Dan]

I wonder if in the refugee/asylum process there is at some point a decision made on whether the asylum seekers are good people or bad people?

Once the war is over in Syria and ISIS crushed, could we see an influx of salafist asylum seekers claiming persecution ?

A poll of Syrian refugees gave a support rating of 13% to Isis, I think that boat has already sailed.

[ozyjon]

Though I'm not German it's amazing what Germany did to help those who asked for asylum. UK took not even 500 refugees whereas Germany granted shelter to more than 1000000. Shame on all other countries refusing to fulfill humanitarian duty. Including my Irish countrymen.

I'm sorry, look deeper and seek the truth, because we in the richest countries are bombarded

with pictures of malnourished children for the sakes of giving money, the same ''humanitarian

duty'' you speak of does not apply here, this has nothing to do with ''humanitarian'' it has all

to do with the Muslim invasion of Europe, and the financial burden on many countries that will

cause financial hardship on the locals who didn't ask these people to come to their countries

who are now resurrecting border controls and building ''the new Berlin wall'' all over Europe.

Another thought, how many religions convert to Islam? how many Muslims convert to other

religions = 0

[Saradoc1972]

The UN and the UNHCR are not in a position to dictate to countries who they should take or for how long. If countries wish to give temporary asylum/visas, that is up to the country. The problem when children are born is that you cannot force another country to give them citizenship.

As far as millions coming under family reunification, again it is up to the host country to decide how many immigrants will be allowed to enter. Germany is under no obligation to provide family reunification above the immigrant quotas the gov't sets.

I know that when I was working in the former Yugoslavia, Germany had hosted many, many refugees during the war, but they were being returned after the war. Part of the program was to make sure that the returnees had suitable places to live, services were available to the needy and jobs were available.

Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan are logistically and culturally not as easy to deal with, nor are some of the African countries.

That's really informative, one more quirk to this I've missed so far.

So if they beget children while on "temporary stay" in Germany, those children might not be allowed into the home country in question, even if deported, meaning the whole family can stay? There's going to be a new baby-boomer generation. And a certain portion of those kids will not be going to Kindergarten but the friendly local Madressa.

As to the obligations Germany is facing, there is both Art. 6 German Basic Law and Art. 8 European Convention on Human Rights. Can't deport the parents if baby can't go. It probably has a "Menschenrechtskern", so it can't be abrogated at all as per Art. 1 and 79 Basic Law (i.e. touches human dignity).

That ridiculous repatriation expectation is only a little pacifier shoved into the mouths of the emerging majority of Germans who see their livelihood and way of life threatened by what's happening to Germany. Big way.

Repatriating people from the Balkans? Talk about low hanging fruit.

Less than 5 months ago, August 6^th 2015, Merkel gave an interview on German state television ZDF "Berlin Direkt" claiming (Youtube link, in German)

*foreign language edited out*

[snip... sentence runs from 0:31 to 1:08 of that video, it's possibly one actual sentence form start to end, including lavishing praise on Federal Immigration Office BAMF for doing such a tremendous job)

"Reception camps , and speedy adjudication of applications, are so important, because if refugees ...or asylum-seekers ... have once arrived in the municipal shelters, it's going to be very, very difficult sending them home again."

So, unless I've got everything wrong, Merkel is breathing hot and cold at the same time.

Whatever your take on Pegida, AFD, and their infamous battle-cry of "Lügenprese" (lying press), I feel I am being lied to. Nonstop.

[sawadee1947]

I wonder if in the refugee/asylum process there is at some point a decision made on whether the asylum seekers are good people or bad people?

Once the war is over in Syria and ISIS crushed, could we see an influx of salafist asylum seekers claiming persecution ?

Of course. There are always persecuted people in every country, but this situation has been blown out of proportion and every "hanger-on" imaginable (and some not) have been making full use of Merkel's ill-advised welcome. So easy to allow people in, but it's going to be a nightmare to send any back, assuming the authorities can correctly identity the country to send them to, and that country agrees to take the returnees. That's after the "due process" and the rich lawyers getting their hands into the publicly funded defence appeals against deportation. It's a huge gravy train. The guy making money out of his inflatable domes to house refugees is the tip of the iceberg.

Meantime - Germany has such a poor military they can not even support their own aircraft properly to assist with anything on the ground. It is very noticeable the the europeans nations rely heavily on French and Dutch contingents for their "boots on the ground". The mighty wealth of Germany doesn't stretch as far as a decent military force.

The mighty wealth of Germany doesn't stretch as far as a decent military force.

Probably they learned their lesson: even a WEST WALL did not prevent anything.....

[sawadee1947]

Though I'm not German it's amazing what Germany did to help those who asked for asylum. UK took not even 500 refugees whereas Germany granted shelter to more than 1000000. Shame on all other countries refusing to fulfill humanitarian duty. Including my Irish countrymen.

I'm sorry, look deeper and seek the truth, because we in the richest countries are bombarded

with pictures of malnourished children for the sakes of giving money, the same ''humanitarian

duty'' you speak of does not apply here, this has nothing to do with ''humanitarian'' it has all

to do with the Muslim invasion of Europe, and the financial burden on many countries that will

cause financial hardship on the locals who didn't ask these people to come to their countries

who are now resurrecting border controls and building ''the new Berlin wall'' all over Europe.

Another thought, how many religions convert to Islam? how many Muslims convert to other

religions = 0

give yourself a break.....how to speak about a "Muslim Invasion" when it's only 1 million. That's not even 0.14% of EU population.

What a ridiculous quote, man

[Celer et Audax]

I am not sure if all UK born are so arrogant. You (UK) reject a mother with a little child, just escaped bombs and terror in Syria? You don't want to give asylum in your wealthy country? Not giving shelter, food and education for at least 3 years? You do not want to share with them? But you agree to let them die outside in front of your border like beggars?

You are the most worst evil in Europe. But enjoy your day far away from poverty and death!

The U.K. has a long history of accepting "Asylum" seekers going back for hundreds of years!! Take for example the French Huguenots who as Protestants fled from religious persecution in catholic France around the 16th century

Besides at the moment the UK is full!!!

[geriatrickid]

It's surprising how politicians suddenly have a change of policy when their own livlihood is under threat at the next Election !

I have a feeling that she will not be running next election.

Any woman who is afraid of an old friendly black lab is unworthy of holding a leadership position.

Poor Konni (RIP) was a gentle creature who's most dangerous action was to wag his tail hard.

[Steely Dan]

The UN and the UNHCR are not in a position to dictate to countries who they should take or for how long. If countries wish to give temporary asylum/visas, that is up to the country. The problem when children are born is that you cannot force another country give them citizenship.

As far as millions coming under family reunification, again it is up to the host country to decide how many immigrants will be allowed to enter. Germany is under no obligation to provide family reunification above the immigrant quotas the gov't sets.

I know that when I was working in the former Yugoslavia, Germany had hosted many, many refugees during the war, but they were being returned after the war. Part of the program was to make sure that the returnees had suitable places to live, services were available to the needy and jobs were available.

Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan are logistically and culturally not as easy to deal with, nor are some of the African countries.

That's really informative, one more quirk to this I've missed so far.

So if they beget children while on "temporary stay" in Germany, those children might not be allowed into the home country in question, even if deported, meaning the whole family can stay? There's going to be a new baby-boomer generation. And a certain portion of those kids will not be going to Kindergarten but the friendly local Madressa.

As to the obligations Germany is facing, there is both Art. 6 German Basic Law and Art. 8 European Convention on Human Rights. Can't deport the parents if baby can't go. It probably has a Menschenrechtskern", so it can't be abrogated at all as per Art. 1 and 79 Basic Law (i.e. touches human dignity).

That ridiculous repatriation expectation is only a little pacifier shoved into the mouths of the emerging majority of Germans who see their livelihood and way of life threatened by what's happening to Germany. Big way.

Repatriating people from the Balkans? Talk about low hanging fruit.

Less than 5 months ago, August 6^th 2015, Merkel gave an interview on German state television ZDF "Berlin Direkt" claiming (

)

[snip... sentence runs from 0:31 to 1:08 of that video, it's possibly one actual sentence form start to end, including lavishing praise on Federal Immigration Office BAMF for doing such a tremendous job)

"Reception camps , and speedy adjudication of applications, are so important, because if refugees ...or asylum-seekers ... have once arrived in the municipal shelters, it's going to be very, very difficult sending them home again."

So, unless I've got everything wrong, Merkel is breathing hot and cold at the same time.

Whatever your take on Pegida, AFD, and their infamous battle-cry of "Lügenprese" (lying press), I feel I am being lied to. Nonstop.

You are.

http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/02/02/top-german-journalist-admits-live-on-air-national-news-agenda-set-by-government/

[MAJIC]

Meaningless words to try to bolster her own political position and stem her rising unpopularity.

These migrants ain't leaving ever. They're in now and they're here to stay and get as much off the German taxpayers as they can by any means possible and bring as many "family" members over as they can get away with to join the free lunch.

As the saying goes: there is no such thing as a free lunch,so guess who is paying for this one ?