So build new housing and infrastructure like they've always done



lmao it finally happened, blaming the situation in the middle east on climate change :lol:

Edited by trueanglo: 5/9/2015 02:05:40 AM

[size=7]Refugee Crisis: Rich Arab Nations, Qatar, UAE, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Bahrain Still Not Helping[/size]
By   Kathryn Snowdon
Posted: 04/09/2015 20:28 BST Updated: 04/09/2015 23:59 BST

Every day, refugees risk their lives to escape persecution and war. They travel thousands of miles, hide in car engines, the backs of vehicles and cram onto tiny boats to cross perilous waters, all in a bid to reach safety.

This week, the haunting picture of a little boy's lifeless body washed up on the shore of a Turkish beach forced a discussion about the plight of refugees.

As the biggest refugee crisis since World War Two draws attention to the actions of European leaders, we forget how little Syria's Arab neighbours are doing to ease the hardships facing the displaced.

Amnesty International reports that "from Asia to Europe, large wealthy countries have turned their backs on Syrian refugees. All six Gulf countries, Russia and Japan have not offered to resettle a single refugee".

Despite their proximity to the war-stricken state, Qatar, United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Oman and Bahrain have not offered any resettlement places.

Saudi Arabia and the other Arab states along the Persian Gulf are not only close to Syria, but are very wealthy.

Kenneth Roth, executive director of Human Rights Watch, shared this powerful image depicting the attitude of Gulf states towards Syrian refugees.

But pressure is mounting from within the Gulf states to accept refugees.

Doha News reports that this week, the hashtag #استضافة_لاجئي_سوريا_واجب_خليجي (welcome Syria’s refugees is a Gulf duty) was trending on Twitter.

On Wednesday - the same day as Aylan Kurdi's body was discovered - an editorial piece published in the Gulf Times lambasted the "deafening" silence of the rich Arab states.

The piece read: "Tragically, the cash-rich Gulf countries have not yet issued a collective statement on the crisis – much less come up with a strategy to help the migrants who are overwhelmingly Muslim.

"Turkey has taken in more than 2.5 million Syrian refugees, while not-so-well-off Lebanon is also hosting hundreds of thousands. In this part of the world, however, the silence is deafening."

Sultan Sooud al-Qassemi, a UAE-based columnist, also called on the Gulf states to open their doors to Syrian refugees.

Writing in the IB Times, he said: "With great power comes great responsibility. The Gulf must realise that now is the time to change their policy regarding accepting refugees from the Syria crisis.

"It is the moral, ethical and responsible step to take."

To put it in context, this graphic shows the shocking contrast between how many people the states surrounding Syria are accepting.



According to Forbes, Saudi Arabia’s $776 billion gross domestic product puts it in the top 10 percentile of world nation’s gross domestic products.

Furthermore, Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal Alsaud, a member of Saudi Arabia's royal family, is currently ranked 34th in Forbes' rich list.

Oil-rich nation Kuwait is home to five billionaires, while the UAE has a very wealthy population; the city of Dubai alone is home to nine billionaires.

Forbes reports: "With a population of 2 million according to 2012 figures, visitors are likely to encounter a ten-figure fortune for every 222,223 people in the Emirate."

The staggering wealth of these nations that have so far offered no resettlement places to refugees has not gone unnoticed.

Furthermore, many have highlighted that these rich nations are not innocent when it comes to the Syrian conflict.

To different extents, those within Saudi Arabia, Qatar, UAE and Kuwait have invested in the Civil War, particularly in regards to issuing financial help to rebel forces fighting against Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

For those Syrians wishing to enter a Gulf states, their options are limited and costly.

While officially Syrians can apply for a tourist visa or a work permit for one of the wealthy Arab countries, the process is expensive.

The BBC reports that there is a widespread perception that many Gulf states have unwritten restrictions in place which make it difficult for Syrians to be granted a visa.

According to the BBC, the only Arab countries where a Syrian can travel without a visa are Algeria, Mauritania, Sudan and Yemen.

Other than the rich Middle Eastern nations, other wealthy nations Russia, Japan, Singapore and South Korea have all offered a grand total of 0 places for refugees as well. What's up with that?

Other than the rich Middle Eastern nations, other wealthy nations Russia, Japan, Singapore and South Korea have all offered a grand total of 0 places for refugees as well. What's up with that?

How many have Israel taken. Zero.

Which is ironic considering all the destabilisation and war policy in the middle east has pretty much revolved around hurting Israels enemies. Not to mention the contradiction in their actions like vehemently prescribing diversity and mass immigration to other nations yet having one of the strictest programs in the world to remain a militant Jewish state.

When did I mention the holocaust, or more dramatically, a lack of it?

They're not stupid, and there is no reason that they should.

Edited by 433: 5/9/2015 05:09:43 PM

I believe it has something to do with common human decency. There's every reason they should do (not that Australia is some paradigm of virtue, in that respect)

Seem to like putting the boot into "zionists" and the "illuminati" so I was sort of just making the logical jump.

Will you house them in your home? Or will you rely on other people to pay for it so you can feel good about yourself?

Watch this video, and you'll realise that what we contribute is literally fuck all:

[youtube]LPjzfGChGlE[/youtube]

I believe it has something to do with common human decency. There's every reason they should do (not that Australia is some paradigm of virtue, in that respect)

You're wasting your time talking about common decency. Some people care about others, some people don't.

One of the least empathetic posters here.

Easy to be empathetic behind a computer screen.

Besides, you can blame the selfish parents for their childs death.

You're better than making strawman arguments.

This is rather silly. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I can't help suspecting that you, of all people, would be disgusted if Australia was a Catholic or CofE state? Based on what you've written elsewhere, I can't help suspecting that's the case. I, and most others, would agree with you there. So why is it fine for there to be a Jewish state?

You do realise it's possible to have no issue with Jewish people but to be morally opposed to the actions of the state of Israel.

And yes, speaking out against "Zionism" is not racist. The actions of those who claim to be "Zionists" mean that the position of criticising (even opposing) Zionism is perfectly morally acceptable. It doesn't amount to Antisemitism. Being anti-Israel and Antisemitic aren't one and the same.

There are Jewish people who oppose the actions of the state of Israel. It's a pity that too many support the state of Israel but still some can see sense.

I'll give you an example. This example is antiquated but absurdly prescient.

Sir Isaac Isaacs, Australia's first Australian-born governor-general, and one of the greatest ever Australian statesmen, who died just before the state of Israel was established wrote that it ought never to exist.

I've copied and pasted from Wikipedia here. These were the grounds of Isaacs' objections to political Zionism:

1) A negation of Democracy, and an attempt to revert to the Church-State of bygone ages.
2) Provocative anti-Semitism.
3) Unwarranted by the Balfour Declaration, the Mandate, or any other right; contrary to Zionist assurances to Britain and to the Arabs and in present conditions unjust to other Palestinians politically and to other religions.
4) As regards unrestricted immigration, a discriminatory and an undemocratic camouflage for a Jewish State.
5) An obstruction to the consent of the Arabs to the peaceful and prosperous settlement in Palestine of hundreds of thousands of suffering European Jews, the victims of Nazi atrocities; and provocative of Moslem antagonism within and beyond the Empire, and consequently a danger to its integrity and safety.
6) Inconsistent in demanding on one hand, on a basis of a separate Jewish nationality everywhere Jews are found, Jewish domination in Palestine, and at the same time claiming complete Jewish equality elsewhere than in Palestine, on the basis of a nationality common to the citizens of every faith.

Sir Isaac Isaacs said 'the Zionist movement as a whole...now places its own unwarranted interpretation on the Balfour Declaration, and makes demands that are arousing the antagonism of the Moslem world of nearly 400 millions, thereby menacing the safety of our Empire, endangering world peace and imperiling some of the most sacred associations of the Jewish, Christian, and Moslem faiths. Besides their inherent injustice to others these demands would, I believe, seriously and detrimentally affect the general position of Jews throughout the world'

What a clever bloke. He envisaged every problem the world would face today as a result of the creation of the state of Israel. In the creation of Israel (and subsequently), Zionists were guilty of crimes every bit as bad as those the Nazis inflicted upon the Jews in the Holocaust (albeit not on the same scale). Going through villages and butchering every Arab man, woman and child in those villages in the name of protecting themselves makes me want to vomit. It's sickening.

The worst part is that, without any doubt, the Holocaust was one of the most disgusting things to have happened in human history. Zionists have used the legacy of it to displace and kill other innocent people and for political gain. That's as distasteful as anything could ever be.

Europe is in for a shitshow in the next few decades.

One day we'll turn around to the people that supported this mass migration/invasion and say "see, I told you so." It's your fault for what will happen to Europe over the course of this century.

And :lol: at the people who fell for that blatant piece of political propaganda. Shame on the people who used that dead kid for their own political narratives.

Edited by 433: 5/9/2015 02:40:17 PM

Tasmanian Liberal Party members ....Yesterday the party passed a motion urging the Federal Government to focus on adaptation to climate change "should it occur", rather than reduce carbon emissions.

Some members described climate change as a "furphy".

In moving the motion, Dr John Reid told fellow members there was no evidence of climate change.

"The whole thing has become a huge international hysteria and we have all this stuff about alternative energy and so on as if we're in some sort of desperate situation where we cannot go on using fossil fuel. This is not true," he said.

"What it really is, is green propaganda but it seems to have caught on with everyone, it feeds into people's preconceptions of capitalist greed and about humans wrecking the planet, but there is no scientific basis for it.

"Just because scientists say doesn't mean it's true. You need to have evidence and there is no evidence."

Could we blame the Jews for all of Australian politics' problems too? (blue text as i wouldnt put it past some missing the sarcasm)

Edited by RedKat: 6/9/2015 09:40:16 AM

in b4 this once again derails the thread

You're wasting your time talking about common decency. Some people care about others, some people don't.

One of the least empathetic posters here.

Just trying to clarify, by saying political propaganda, are you implying that "dead kid" didn't happen?

Or was staged?

Or do you think there really was a kid who drowned alone, probably freezing and terrified in his final moments?

Easy to be empathetic behind a computer screen.



Of course it's real, but its just been exploited by politicians to justify their insane policies. Cameron did a complete 180 when he saw the photo, because it was pure emotional blackmail. Are these the type of people you want leading your countries?

We've seen it before and we'll see it again: when there is backlash to this unsustainable arrival of "refugees", the media will push another tragic photo very hard to guilt trip politicians and the general public (see: dead kid on beach, Syrian dad crying with his daughter when he landed in Greece).

Edited by 433: 6/9/2015 12:34:35 PM

I understand what you are saying and you make a good point, but at the end of the day these stories are REAL. The emotion in the people is real. Sometimes these events lead to policy change or a change in the way people view a situation. I wouldn't necessarily call that "blackmail" although I understand where you are coming from. I would agree that people do exploit these things for political gain. Someone also compared the photo to the famous one of the "napalm girl". That photo helped change public opinion about the Vietnam war. A photo of a child suffering at the hands of the failures created by adults is very powerful, and something that resonates with me because my daughter is the same age as that dead kid.

I don't profess to know the solution to this problem. I think that guy and his gumballs makes a good point. We should be doing more to PREVENT the need for people to seek refuge, by doing more in their country, but most things are out of our and the west's hands.

We need to send peacekeepers and humanitarian aid to these countries and remove Assad who is buying oil from ISIS.

I understand what you are saying and you make a good point, but at the end of the day these stories are REAL. The emotion in the people is real. Sometimes these events lead to policy change or a change in the way people view a situation. I wouldn't necessarily call that "blackmail" although I understand where you are coming from. I would agree that people do exploit these things for political gain. Someone also compared the photo to the famous one of the "napalm girl". That photo helped change public opinion about the Vietnam war. A photo of a child suffering at the hands of the failures created by adults is very powerful, and something that resonates with me because my daughter is the same age as that dead kid.

I don't profess to know the solution to this problem. I think that guy and his gumballs makes a good point. We should be doing more to PREVENT the need for people to seek refuge, by doing more in their country, but most things are out of our and the west's hands.