Only white anglos can be educated thank you very much.

Dontcha know nuthin'?

Mad threads brah lol.

-PB

Rich people are immune to indiscriminate bombing and therefore have no need to flee

Most of them are young males, and half of them aren't even Syrian as well.

Sorry mate, white anglos are right wing idiots with an IQ under 50. You're not allowed to be a white-anglo anymore and if you are, you have better not open your mouth with anything other than praise and to confirm that you will be opening your wallet and throwing your money in the air

German customs officials have been going to the media saying half of the owners of Syrian passports don't speak a word of Arabic.....

2 very well sourced claims :lol:

Must be a right wing conspiracy

Economic Migrants buying Fake Syrian Passports

Apparently easy to get fake documents.

I picked some up in World Football last week!

-PB

Ignoring the obvious bias of the telegraph, I don't see where the german customs officials said half don't speak arabic. Just a Syrian dentist living in Croatia with some anecdotal evidence.

I'll also add that the German interior minister did make a comment about some claiming to be Syrian not speaking arabic but I've never seen any mention of "half".

Another spokesperson for the government apparently estimated it at 30%. There's no indication though as to whether these people pretending to be Syrian are or are not genuine refugees, it's quite possible people are buying them because they know they're getting fast tracked.
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2015/09/germany-30-pct-refugees-falsely-claim-syrian-150925103349856.html

Edited by mcjules: 28/9/2015 02:42:39 PM

Aside from questioning the validity of either of your statements, I would ask what is the relevance of whether they are young males or not?

Wouldn't it make sense that those people most likely to be executed or drafted into one of the militias would be young males?

Wouldn't it also make sense that given the harshness of the travel, young men are most likely to be able to brave the conditions to make the trip?

Why does it matter what the age or gender is?

:lol: Gold. I Googled and found like 6 links to the same thing but chose the Telegraph for this reason.

I can't find my original facebook link. The new link claims there are a heap of fake Syrians though. Economic migrants will ruin it for the genuine refugees.

That's why I ignored it, googled myself and found other (also slightly biased links). I'll take quotes on face value though.

Still doesn't establish that the "fake Syrians" aren't genuine refugees.

:lol: oh Jules, what has happened to you?

RE: the refugees, of course it doesn't. The concern though is if Europe goes 'that's it we can't handle more' and lets pull out a number of 25% are economic migrants, that screws over hundreds of thousands of genuine Syrian refugees.....

You whine about a generalisation and then make a generalisation about how well educated the migrants are.

The fact that the overwhelming majority are young males is relevant because in war genuine refugees are usually women, children and those men who are unable to fight, i.e. The exact opposite of the hordes claiming to be refugees. The young males are being sent to secure residence and then bring the extended family over later on reunion visas. Despite the lack of weapons on display this is an invasion, one that depends upon the weakness and lack of willingness to protect their culture in Europe.

I haven't made any generalisations - I was observing what has been documented. I didn't claim that everyone was a Doctor or Engineer.

Why are only women and children refugees? Males are fleeing because they get targeted for executions and drafting into armies.

And - I do not actually accept the proposition that it is mostly single males to start with.

The fact that you have called it an invasion and indicates a "lack of willingness" to protect European culture is ridiculous. Europe has a population of 500 million. Even 20 million refugees wouldn't be able to threaten that.

Ok I'll pull out a number out of thin air too, 0.001% are economic migrants. That screws over very few genuine refugees.

To be more serious, you are still assuming that a great proportion of the people with fake passports are economic migrants and themselves genuine refugees. Do you have any evidence of that? I've looked and I've found nothing but opinion pieces from right wing columnists that make that assertion.

Because letting in thousands of sexually frustrated, angry and often misogynistic young men will do wonders for the state of Women in Europe. :lol: Also, young men should be fighting for their country and not abandoning their mothers, sisters and daughters to ISIS.

When you let these young, fighting aged men into your country with such numbers, it becomes less about refugees and more an invasion, which is precisely what this is.

Maybe because the left wing ones choose to ignore that fact :roll:

Wouldn't give the left wing columnists much credence either. I'm looking for quotes attributed to people that would have credible knowledge of the situation (e.g. someone from the German immigration). Without that or something similar, how can it be a fact?

It's a fact because it plays into your bias and therefore easy for you to believe.

Again with the generalisations. Assuming that most are young men. Assuming that they are misogynistic. Assuming that they are abandoning family members.

All based on not much fact.

It's very easy to tell these people they should go fight in a 4-sided war they want no part of. What would you do if you were in their position?

I know I would want to live, and I would want my family to live. I wouldn't want to pick sides between fighting for Assad and fighting for ISIS.

I think its important to keep in mind that we all won the lottery by being able to live in a rich western country in the early 21st century. We are luckier than anyone who has ever lived in history. We are not 'better' than these people fleeing, we are only luckier.

So what, we should piss away our luck to feel better about ourselves? Is that what you're saying?

Like this German nurse who is going to be evicted so refugees have somewhere to live? http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/germany/11891631/German-woman-threatened-with-eviction-to-make-way-for-refugees.html

Or how Germans are being evicted to make space for migrants?
http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/6583/germany-migrants-housing

Or how their will be a dramatic increase in rapes due to the savagery of these people?
http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/6527/migrants-rape-germany
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015/09/16/watch-women-locking-tents-avoid-male-migrant-attacks/

Note, only 10% of the above camp is female. So much for the women and children ey?




Edited by 433: 29/9/2015 03:53:24 PM

the shit that 433 reads...



Edited by mcjules: 29/9/2015 04:15:34 PM

Merely looking at your sources tells me everything I need to know. Telegraph article aside, those sources are extremely dodgy.

And if you read the Telegraph article, the woman being evicted is supportive of Germany taking in refugees:

"Ms Halbey insisted she was not against Germany taking refugees in. When asylum-seekers moved into the flat above hers last May, they got on well, she said.

“We take care of each other. Helping people, this is my commandment,” she said."

This is a case of the local council acting badly in this situation, not an indication of an "invasion".

Just waiting for you to mention the New World Order or Agenda 21....

Breitbart is a well-known conservative news/opinion site. So If I cited BBC or CNN or other mainstream outlets it would be better somehow? They're complicit in this invasion just as much as the EU are.

Nice ad hom boys, enjoy your Islamic Europe in a centuries time.

Edited by 433: 29/9/2015 06:06:37 PM

Being a non-private organisation, like the ABC, it is more likely to report factually by having less of a profit based incentive to distort the truth to garner sales. Subsequently, it's funny how right wingers label the ABC & BBC as being left wing, implying by extrapolation that privately owned media is full of lying, the overwhelming majority of which is right wing in Australia.

Ad hominem? I'm questioning sources that are explicitly presenting an agenda. It's legitimate to have concerns as to how to manage such a large flow of people in a short period. But frothing at the mouth over "Islamification" of Europe is nonsense.

The other thing i would ask is if you want to stop this "invasion" - how would you actually go about it?

Exactly. ABC and BBC are far more reliable than these conspiracy sites.

What you posted in the other thread is how I treat your posts


Anyway as I posted in another one of these Syrian asylum seeker threads, there's no hate for you here. I kinda feel pity for those that live with this unjustified rage for other human beings that in reality just want to live their lives.

There's not much more point debating with you though. You'll make exaggerated claims or reference sources that I don't respect at all. I'll make other claims and you'll express your fears of "islamification" which to be frank I don't give a stuff about. Perpetual stalemate.