Refugees in Greece and Serbia forced to endure sub-zero temperatures

[yogi100]

On 1/11/2017 at 4:01 PM, DavidVincent said:

So you know the past of Syria, Libya, Iraq,...and why their countries are now under constant threat, war or western bombings, right? Is it because they are lazy or because western countries went there to bring freedom and ended by putting those countries on their knees. It is then not a surprise if right after Guaddafi went down that a french company like Total took 30% of the oil companies, why UK blamed their government in a report which pointed the abuses during this war as well. It is not like the USA wanted Iraq to fall to free them, but because of the oil there as well. Syria pipeline project which would compete with the USA sponsored pipeline neither.

In Africa you are probably aware that in Cameroon 3 months ago more than 150 people died on a train accident, mostly because the french company Bollore) who built the line used poor material and no quality/safety control. Uranium, precious metal for electronic components, all of this which can only be found in countries in Africa only...etc... History of africa and its past is not hidden...have a look at the countries which are currently at war or on the brink of civil war and their history...

I remember as well a pretty picture of thousands of people on the boats from Europe to Algeria and Morroco during world war 2...just to flee the war...why is this different.

As for the people living on benefits...What do you have to say of  more than 30k UK citizen living in UE on benefits...and I am sure we can find some numbers linked to Thailand as well...

 

 

 

The difference is  is that those UK citizens receiving benefits helped pay for them when they were younger. And 1,400,000 of our young men died for our country in the last century. Not to have it handed over piece by piece to third world barbarians.

[yogi100]

On 1/11/2017 at 5:21 PM, DavidVincent said:

Under Assad Damascus and Syria was multicultural, even catholic and jews. However ISIS didn't arrive in Syria from nowhere...Guess who helped them rise? Syrian revolution with moderate rebels? what a joke!

As i worked for Total i can assure you the expatriates are well paid, not the locals. Don't you think it is quite strange that all the countries at war nowdays are the ones with precious raw material/oil and other things? 

Anyway I mark my point : migrants to Europe in their very vast majority do not come to enjoy the benefits of the country they come to, but flee countries torn by war and corruption. If you believe they come to not work and live so well you are just one of the guys who believe  far right lies.

 

So you think they wil buy a 500$ ipad and not eat for a month?

As I mentioned before : migration brings more money than it cost. Look for the numbers and numerous studies.

 

Well why do they travel all the way up to the UK, Germany and Sweden then?

[yogi100]

On 1/11/2017 at 5:38 PM, simple1 said:

 

Check out the content at the UNHCR link I provided above. In addition you may recall the Europol report last year which talked to the disappearance of approx 10,000 child refugees; most likely trafficked by organised crime gangs, A part of the response has been try to  provide secure accommodation for children in  camps in Greece, hopefully they will not be wandering around. 

 

More like 9,950 young men claiming to be children. That's why they've disappeared.

[simple1]

5 minutes ago, yogi100 said:

 

More like 9,950 young men claiming to be children. That's why they've disappeared.

 

I prefer to reply on Europol reporting. Not yet another unproven post by you underlining your extremely bigoted opinions

 

http://missingchildreneurope.eu/news/Post/1023/Europol-confirms-the-disappearance-of-10-000-migrant-children-in-Europe

[yogi100]

3 minutes ago, simple1 said:

 

I prefer to reply on Europol reporting. Not yet another unproven post by you underlining your extremely bigoted opinions

 

http://missingchildreneurope.eu/news/Post/1023/Europol-confirms-the-disappearance-of-10-000-migrant-children-in-Europe

 

There's no need to be personal. Discuss the topic rather than your opinion of my views.

 

BTW you forgot racist, fascist and far right.

[yogi100]

13 hours ago, Shawn0000 said:

 

They do, Saudi took 2.5 million refugees, people in the UK are moaning about a pledge to take 20,000 over the next 4 years, and they feel the need to lie about how many other countries have taken in attempt to take the attention away from their own lack of humanity, shameful stuff.

 

SA has taken no refugees. All it's done is to provide funding for the building of mosques in Europe.

[yogi100]

12 hours ago, LammyTS1 said:

The Middle East has been at war for over 1000 years.

You state, only the past 30  years has been orchestrated by the West?

Sorry but the Middle East requires no help from Western countries to be at war....

 

Then the yanks got involved.....

[yogi100]

11 hours ago, LammyTS1 said:

 

What portion of UK citizens are on unemployment benefits due to mass uncontrolled migration? 

 

Hordes of warm bedding Eastern European scab labour has put plenty of Englishmen on the dole.

[yogi100]

11 hours ago, Shawn0000 said:

 

Shameful, there are posters on here with more compassion for a stay dog than a family fleeing war.

The neighboring countries are full, the UK should spend as we helped caused this surge of extremism through our senseless and illegal wars, but most importantly because we are humane. 

A refugee will travel where a refugee will travel, it's up to them. 

No, we cannot call your nonsense getting that straight, we can call it getting that twisted though.

 

The UK has one of, if not the highest density of population in the whole of Europe.

 

We helped the Americans to invade Iraq, to overthrow Saddam and to give the Iraqi people freedom and democracy because nineteen Saudi Arabians and one Egyptian attacked the USA on 9/11/01. The Middle Easterners should appreciate our efforts. We also helped the Libyans overthrow the tyrannical Colonel Gaddafi. Now the Syrians want to come and freeload off of us. Where's the gratitude. Let's hope Trump has something up his sleeve and reverses his promised no Islamic immigration policy.

[Shawn0000]

25 minutes ago, yogi100 said:

 

The UK has one of, if not the highest density of population in the whole of Europe.

 

We helped the Americans to invade Iraq, to overthrow Saddam and to give the Iraqi people freedom and democracy because nineteen Saudi Arabians and one Egyptian attacked the USA on 9/11/01. The Middle Easterners should appreciate our efforts. We also helped the Libyans overthrow the tyrannical Colonel Gaddafi. Now the Syrians want to come and freeload off of us. Where's the gratitude. Let's hope Trump has something up his sleeve and reverses his promised no Islamic immigration policy.

 

We killed over 1 million people in the process, that kind of overshadows all the "good" we did by removing their "tyrants" who could not have caused so many deaths and so much suffering in a hundred of their lifetimes.

[Shawn0000]

1 hour ago, yogi100 said:

 

SA has taken no refugees. All it's done is to provide funding for the building of mosques in Europe.

 

Yes they have, they have taken 2.5 million, stop making things up.

[yogi100]

50 minutes ago, Shawn0000 said:

 

We killed over 1 million people in the process, that kind of overshadows all the "good" we did by removing their "tyrants" who could not have caused so many deaths and so much suffering in a hundred of their lifetimes.

 

I wholeheartedly agree with you. I was being flippant. We should never have stuck our noses in in the first place, I was ridiculing the whole shebang.

 

1 hour ago, Shawn0000 said:

But for work commitments I would have been one of the million or so people who demonstrated against the invasion in 2003 although possibly for rather different reasons than those of many others. It would have been the first time I would ever have been on any kind of a demo in my life such was my personal opposition to such an ill fated, stupid, tunnel visioned decision.

[yogi100]

1 hour ago, Shawn0000 said:

 

Yes they have, they have taken 2.5 million, stop making things up.

 

I'm not making things up and you well know it.

 

In March of last year SA was criticised for not taking in any Syrian refugees. It was a well publicised fact along with the other wealthy Arabian oil producing nations. So they must have done an about turn just recently. They're the same culture and the same religion so they should take all of them. They've got the money, they're some of the the richest nations per head of population in the world.

 

Admittedly we're partly to blame but I personally wanted nothing to with it. I think we should put our own needy and hard up pensioners first. No one I know wants any more refugees, asylum seekers, health tourists, welfare claimants nor immigrants of any kind in the UK regardless of Blairs quest for glory alongside his pal George Bush.

 

You must have noticed your darling Obama's not opened his arms in welcome and it's the Yanks fault all this has come about! By rights America should take in millions, they've got more than enough room. Stick 'em all in one state and they'd still not feel the pinch. Wyoming or Montana would love to have 'em.

 

We've already got 250,000 registered homeless in Britain. We're not just full up, we're overflowing.

 

After WW2 the worlds population was 2.5 billion now it's approaching 8 billion. But it's not our problem and we need leaders with the spine to acknowledge this and tell the world the UK will take no more.

 

Our own young people need homes that they can afford and that will never happen while we keep patronising every Tom, Dick and Abdul who turns up at our door with his hand out seeking charity, it should begin at home!

[Scott]

Off-topic posts which makes remarks directed at another member have been removed along with replies.   Continue and you will be suspended.  

[Shawn0000]

55 minutes ago, yogi100 said:

 

I'm not making things up and you well know it.

 

In March of last year SA was criticised for not taking in any Syrian refugees. It was a well publicised fact along with the other wealthy Arabian oil producing nations. So they must have done an about turn just recently. They're the same culture and the same religion so they should take all of them. They've got the money, they're some of the the richest nations per head of population in the world.

 

Admittedly we're partly to blame but I personally wanted nothing to with it. I think we should put our own needy and hard up pensioners first. No one I know wants any more refugees, asylum seekers, health tourists, welfare claimants nor immigrants of any kind in the UK regardless of Blairs quest for glory alongside his pal George Bush.

 

You must have noticed your darling Obama's not opened his arms in welcome and it's the Yanks fault all this has come about! By rights America should take in millions, they've got more than enough room. Stick 'em all in one state and they'd still not feel the pinch. Wyoming or Montana would love to have 'em.

 

We've already got 250,000 registered homeless in Britain. We're not just full up, we're overflowing.

 

After WW2 the worlds population was 2.5 billion now it's approaching 8 billion. But it's not our problem and we need leaders with the spine to acknowledge this and tell the world the UK will take no more.

 

Our own young people need homes that they can afford and that will never happen while we keep patronising every Tom, Dick and Abdul who turns up at our door with his hand out seeking charity, it should begin at home!

 

No, actually I know you are just mislead.  Saudi is not a party to the convention on refugees, so when they take in people who in another country would be classed as refugees, in Saudi they are just classed as migrants, this led to some rags saying they have not taken any Syrians when all the evidence points to the fact that they have.  Not sure why you think a nation of the same religion and same culture just "should" take in all the refugees, it makes no sense in my unbigoted mind, we are all people, we can all help.  Anyway, who in their right mind would expect a country to see their population expand by 50%?  Obviously there is a need for more than one nation to help when so many people are displaced.

 

You seem completely deluded to just how big this really is, there are 5 million refugees already outside Syria and a further 6 million displaced within Syria.  Wyoming would really feel a population increase of 2000%, as would Montana feel an increase of 1000%. 

 

The UK is not full, there are more empty properties than homeless.

 

The reason for the housing crisis in the UK is not immigration, it is a combination of second homes and the poor distribution of employment. We need politicians who have the spine to tax their own ilk out of causing the shortage instead of continuing the distraction technique that is blaming immigration and to put funding into regions outside of the south east and create a more even distribution of industry throughout the UK.

[Scott]

Troll post removed.  

[yogi100]

22 minutes ago, Shawn0000 said:

 

No, actually I know you are just mislead.  Saudi is not a party to the convention on refugees, so when they take in people who in another country would be classed as refugees, in Saudi they are just classed as migrants, this led to some rags saying they have not taken any Syrians when all the evidence points to the fact that they have.  Not sure why you think a nation of the same religion and same culture just "should" take in all the refugees, it makes no sense in my unbigoted mind, we are all people, we can all help.  Anyway, who in their right mind would expect a country to see their population expand by 50%?  Obviously there is a need for more than one nation to help when so many people are displaced.

 

You seem completely deluded to just how big this really is, there are 5 million refugees already outside Syria and a further 6 million displaced within Syria.  Wyoming would really feel a population increase of 2000%, as would Montana feel an increase of 1000%. 

 

The UK is not full, there are more empty properties than homeless.

 

The reason for the housing crisis in the UK is not immigration, it is a combination of second homes and the poor distribution of employment. We need politicians who have the spine to tax their own ilk out of causing the shortage instead of continuing the distraction technique that is blaming immigration and to put funding into regions outside of the south east and create a more even distribution of industry throughout the UK.

 

 

It is immigration. There council estates full of immigrants or the offspring of immigrants especially in London that were built by English working men and should house English people rather than foreigners. Our youngsters have not got a hope of getting their own places unless they're well off.

[thaibeachlovers]

17 hours ago, ilostmypassword said:

You should try reading non fake news sometimes. If you did, you'd know that Saudi Arabia has been slashing pay and cutting jobs for its own citizens. Their economy is in deep trouble.

That's good news. I lived there for years and I think they deserve to be in the deep brown stuff for the way they wasted money.

However, if they can't afford to take refugees, how can Europe which has been in the financial doo doo for years?

[thaibeachlovers]

15 hours ago, Shawn0000 said:

 

It was as much us as them, so by your logic we should take half!

 

The war has not been the best thing that happened to many, just some arms dealers, much like all wars. 

 

No, not many stay in Greece, funny that, leaving their bombed out remains of a home with only that which they can carry, using the last of their money to buy their way to safety, and as they try to decide the best for their family now they have to start again from scratch they don't choose to seek asylum in a country with a completely destroyed economy, I wonder why?  Perhaps it is because they are not looking for a life where they have little opportunity to work and will be reliant on handouts but actually want the chance to work, contribute and succeed.

Perhaps I misunderstood, but I was not aware that offering asylum included the obligation to provide work, especially when many of the host's citizens are already unemployed.

[yogi100]

54 minutes ago, Shawn0000 said:

 

No, actually I know you are just mislead.  Saudi is not a party to the convention on refugees, so when they take in people who in another country would be classed as refugees, in Saudi they are just classed as migrants, this led to some rags saying they have not taken any Syrians when all the evidence points to the fact that they have.  Not sure why you think a nation of the same religion and same culture just "should" take in all the refugees, it makes no sense in my unbigoted mind, we are all people, we can all help.  Anyway, who in their right mind would expect a country to see their population expand by 50%?  Obviously there is a need for more than one nation to help when so many people are displaced.

 

You seem completely deluded to just how big this really is, there are 5 million refugees already outside Syria and a further 6 million displaced within Syria.  Wyoming would really feel a population increase of 2000%, as would Montana feel an increase of 1000%. 

 

The UK is not full, there are more empty properties than homeless.

 

The reason for the housing crisis in the UK is not immigration, it is a combination of second homes and the poor distribution of employment. We need politicians who have the spine to tax their own ilk out of causing the shortage instead of continuing the distraction technique that is blaming immigration and to put funding into regions outside of the south east and create a more even distribution of industry throughout the UK.

 

You seem to have all the facts and figures to hand so you must be able to tell us what the percentage increase of the population of the USA would be rather than that of the sparcely settled states of Wyoming or Montana were Obama to have invited them all in. The Yanks were the main cause of the trouble so it was up to their president to step up to the plate.

 

The empty properties are second homes, vacant for various reasons or too expensive for the average tenant. But that is another matter and does not come under the topic being discussed. However if I could afford a second home I'd be very careful who I let stay in it and it certainly would not be refugees nor asylum seekers. Neither would you probably.

 

Are there 2.5 million empty homes in the UK, I very much doubt it. Not ones that are available for rental anyway.

Edited January 13, 2017 by yogi100

[yogi100]

44 minutes ago, Shawn0000 said:

 

No, actually I know you are just mislead.  Saudi is not a party to the convention on refugees, so when they take in people who in another country would be classed as refugees, in Saudi they are just classed as migrants, this led to some rags saying they have not taken any Syrians when all the evidence points to the fact that they have.  Not sure why you think a nation of the same religion and same culture just "should" take in all the refugees, it makes no sense in my unbigoted mind, we are all people, we can all help.  Anyway, who in their right mind would expect a country to see their population expand by 50%?  Obviously there is a need for more than one nation to help when so many people are displaced.

 

You seem completely deluded to just how big this really is, there are 5 million refugees already outside Syria and a further 6 million displaced within Syria.  Wyoming would really feel a population increase of 2000%, as would Montana feel an increase of 1000%. 

 

The UK is not full, there are more empty properties than homeless.

 

The reason for the housing crisis in the UK is not immigration, it is a combination of second homes and the poor distribution of employment. We need politicians who have the spine to tax their own ilk out of causing the shortage instead of continuing the distraction technique that is blaming immigration and to put funding into regions outside of the south east and create a more even distribution of industry throughout the UK.

 

 

How many of these refugees are you giving a home to? I'll bet it's none yet you think that the rest of us should have to live alongside them and wait for one of their ISIS moles come out the woodwork and run around in a lorry or with a machete, explosives or an AK47 and start sending us to Kingdom come like they did in London, Paris, Berlin, Nice, Brussels, Madrid or wherever the next atrocity happens to be.

 

How am I mislead.

Edited January 13, 2017 by yogi100

[Shawn0000]

28 minutes ago, yogi100 said:

 

 

It is immigration. There council estates full of immigrants or the offspring of immigrants especially in London that were built by English working men and should house English people rather than foreigners. Our youngsters have not got a hope of getting their own places unless they're well off.

 

The "offspring of immigrants" are not British people?  Shame on you, conversation over.

[dick dasterdly]

15 hours ago, Shawn0000 said:

 

They shouldn't, they should apply for the jobs in their area that the immigrants are taking, they should only move if there are no jobs at all, and move to one of the areas like I suggested, where there is a labor shortage that immigrants are filling.  The problem is that unemployed British people are just not willing to put themselves out like the immigrants, so they don't get the jobs.

I fail to see why the indigenous population should be forced to seek work away from their home and families because immigrants are cheaper to employ, not to mention less likely to say anything about poor working conditions etc.

[jak2002003]

15 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

I fail to see why the indigenous population should be forced to seek work away from their home and families because immigrants are cheaper to employ, not to mention less likely to say anything about poor working conditions etc.

Agree.  I am not raciest, qualified and skilled people from any country should be able to travel around and apply for the work that is available, and be treated fairly.

 

However, what happens is that unscrupulous employers will exploit immigrants, legal or otherwise.  They will pay them below the minimum wage, make them work 7 days a week, long hours, no sick pay or holiday pay. These people will have to live in substandard, sometimes dangerous disgusting housing, again the employer will use there provided housing to pay them less money.

 

Now some legal immigrants can put up with this for a few years... to same money (which is worth a lot more in their own country) to have the plan to get out eventually.

 

Now no indigenous person in their right mind would endure this kind of work and treatment... not only for the conditions and lack of pay, but because is illegal in immoral.  Its the employers fault here, not the immigrants... but they get blamed for taking jobs off the local people. 

 

 

[LammyTS1]

 

Why, because you have no idea, more like!  Try asking the company, if the answer is not satisfactory then ask a judge at an employment tribunal.  Your one example shows nothing except your willingness to take one unknown, add some pure speculation and present it as if you have some evidence, sorry but you have nothing at all there, we don't know who had been there longer, who was more valuable to the company or what was actually offered to the employees, all we know is your little story and the fact that you yourself don't know more.

What I do know is that from a dept of 12 people being closed, 3 kept jobs within the company.

All 3 being immigrants. Why? Well the other 9 were all white. The other 9 all had been working for the company longer, including one for 18 years.

Ask the company you say? Ask an employment tribunal you say? You must be seriously joking. Because of looney liberal laws in the UK, only ethnic minorities prosper whilst white uk citizens are labelled racist. It's unfortunate that the country treats outsiders better than their own, but true.

The problem is that this happened in the UK. If 2 people are equally qualified and experienced to perform the job, the following rules apply:-

White UK man V black man? Black man gets job.

White UK man V Immigrant? Immigrant gets job.

White UK man V ethnic minority? Ethnic minority gets job.

White UK man V White UK woman? White woman gets job.

And the list goes on.

Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

[F4UCorsair]

5 hours ago, Shawn0000 said:

 

Yes they have, they have taken 2.5 million, stop making things up.

 

 

NO!!!! Saudi Arabia has taken NO 'refugees'.  Their logic was that they thought there 'may be terrorists among them'.

 

Of course they say they are taking 'migrants', just as China says it's cutting emissions (but not permitting any oversight!!!) whilst opening a new coal fired power station every week!!!  It would be difficult to hear a more paper thin argument than Saudi Arabia is calling them 'migrants' to avoid them being persecuted.   Just laughable.

 

They tell you what they think you want, and need, to hear.

Edited January 13, 2017 by F4UCorsair

[Shawn0000]

31 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

I fail to see why the indigenous population should be forced to seek work away from their home and families because immigrants are cheaper to employ, not to mention less likely to say anything about poor working conditions etc.

 

I fail to see how you read that into what I wrote.

[LammyTS1]

On just your last part, let me paraphrase a Louis CK- bit: if someone with no language skills, no connections can take away your job, you probably suck at it!


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

Yes that would be true in any other country other than the UK.

Just proves how looney liberal laws have almost destroyed the UK.



Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

[Shawn0000]

6 minutes ago, F4UCorsair said:

 

 

NO!!!! Saudi Arabia has taken NO 'refugees'.  Their logic was that they thought there 'may be terrorists among them'.

 

According to the United Nations High Commission of Refugees, you are plain wrong.

[F4UCorsair]

1 minute ago, Shawn0000 said:

 

According to the United Nations High Commission of Refugees, you are plain wrong.

 

 

Yep, they believe what they're told by Saudi Arabia, just as the save the planet idiots believe China on emissions.