Battlefield Calais: 'the swarm'

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban has reportedly said that his country does not want to take in large numbers of Muslims, in defence of Hungary's response to the surge in refugees trying to enter the country.

"I think we have a right to decide that we do not want a large number of Muslim people in our country," Orban reportedly told journalists outside the EU headquarters at Brussels.

"We do not like the consequences," the DPA news agency reported him as saying, referring to the country's 150-year history of Ottoman rule during the 16th and 17th centuries.

Orban said those fleeing conflict in countries such as Syria's should not try to cross into Hungary, as he defended the country's decision to erect a fence along its border.

"Please don't come ... It's risky to come. We can't guarantee that you will be accepted," Orban said in Brussels, adding that it would not be humane or morally right to "falsify" people's dreams.

"We Hungarians are full of fear, people in Europe are full of fear because they see that the European leaders, among them the prime ministers, are not able to control the situation," Orban said.

His comments came as refugees who boarded a train bound for the Austrian border clashed with Hungarian police as they were forcefully unloaded and taken to a refugee camp.

Clinging to railway tracks

Thousands of refugees had been sleeping rough outside the Budapest train station as police blocked them from entering for two days.

After they were eventually let in on Thursday morning, a packed train departed bound for Sopron, a town near the Austrian border.

But Hungarian police stopped the train before its destination, with police forcing refugees off and directing them onto buses to take them to a refugee camp, state news agency MTI reported.

Some families clung to railway tracks after trying to run away from police.

About 50 riot police were lined up as a replacement train allowed non-refugee passengers to continue their journey, Reuters reported.

Orban's chief of staff said police would stick to the EU's Schengen rules and make all checks needed on refugees travelling on domestic trains towards the country's western border.

Hungary has been widely criticised for its way of handling the flow of refugees to Europe.

A fence on the border with Serbia is one of several measures underway to make it more difficult for refugees to enter and stay in Hungary. The government is also tightening asylum laws, introducing penalties for illegal border-crossing, and planning to close permanent refugee camps.

EU President Donald Tusk, meanwhile, warned that divisions between western member states and their newer eastern partners were complicating efforts to solve the deepening refugee crisis.

"There is a divide ... between the east and the west of the EU. Some member states are thinking about containing the wave of migration, symbolised by the Hungarian [border] fence," Tusk said.

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2015/09/refugees-hungary-train-station-150903064140564.html
 
It's kind of depressing that the overwhelming response to this crisis is one clouded by emotion.

Of course it's intuitive to want to help desperate people who turn up on Europe's door, but what does this do to solve the problem of people drowning in the Mediterranean? The only logical case to be made (as far as I can see) is that a policy of absolute acceptance for Syrian/Iraqi refugees will increase the number of dead kids washing up on beaches unless something is done to solve the problem on the other side.
 
2cents said:
Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban has reportedly said that his country does not want to take in large numbers of Muslims, in defence of Hungary's response to the surge in refugees trying to enter the country.

"I think we have a right to decide that we do not want a large number of Muslim people in our country," Orban reportedly told journalists outside the EU headquarters at Brussels.

"We do not like the consequences," the DPA news agency reported him as saying, referring to the country's 150-year history of Ottoman rule during the 16th and 17th centuries.

Orban said those fleeing conflict in countries such as Syria's should not try to cross into Hungary, as he defended the country's decision to erect a fence along its border.

"Please don't come ... It's risky to come. We can't guarantee that you will be accepted," Orban said in Brussels, adding that it would not be humane or morally right to "falsify" people's dreams.

"We Hungarians are full of fear, people in Europe are full of fear because they see that the European leaders, among them the prime ministers, are not able to control the situation," Orban said.

His comments came as refugees who boarded a train bound for the Austrian border clashed with Hungarian police as they were forcefully unloaded and taken to a refugee camp.

Clinging to railway tracks

Thousands of refugees had been sleeping rough outside the Budapest train station as police blocked them from entering for two days.

After they were eventually let in on Thursday morning, a packed train departed bound for Sopron, a town near the Austrian border.

But Hungarian police stopped the train before its destination, with police forcing refugees off and directing them onto buses to take them to a refugee camp, state news agency MTI reported.

Some families clung to railway tracks after trying to run away from police.

About 50 riot police were lined up as a replacement train allowed non-refugee passengers to continue their journey, Reuters reported.

Orban's chief of staff said police would stick to the EU's Schengen rules and make all checks needed on refugees travelling on domestic trains towards the country's western border.

Hungary has been widely criticised for its way of handling the flow of refugees to Europe.

A fence on the border with Serbia is one of several measures underway to make it more difficult for refugees to enter and stay in Hungary. The government is also tightening asylum laws, introducing penalties for illegal border-crossing, and planning to close permanent refugee camps.

EU President Donald Tusk, meanwhile, warned that divisions between western member states and their newer eastern partners were complicating efforts to solve the deepening refugee crisis.

"There is a divide ... between the east and the west of the EU. Some member states are thinking about containing the wave of migration, symbolised by the Hungarian [border] fence," Tusk said.

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2015/09/refugees-hungary-train-station-150903064140564.html
Click to expand...
You might not like what he says but at least he's honest.
 
1625487_1616857591916297_752518772863966522_n.png
 
Story of a Jewish man's escape from Hungary during the Holocaust - via Syria:

CN2arlzUsAAOg5P
 
rednev said:
It's kind of depressing that the overwhelming response to this crisis is one clouded by emotion.

Of course it's intuitive to want to help desperate people who turn up on Europe's door, but what does this do to solve the problem of people drowning in the Mediterranean? The only logical case to be made (as far as I can see) is that a policy of absolute acceptance for Syrian/Iraqi refugees will increase the number of dead kids washing up on beaches unless something is done to solve the problem on the other side.
Click to expand...

It also doesn't solve the problem causing the mass exodus.
 
This horrific incident has reminded me of one of the video that I saw almost three years back, and to this day it continues to haunt me.



Termaleh, ‪ Homs‬ : This traumatised, injured and orphaned baby, no more than five months old, is the only survivor from Dr. Abdul Mawla Alif's family after a thermobaric missile fired by Assad's forces hit the house where they were living in Termaleh, Homs earlier tonight. The family had fled to Termaleh to escape regime bombardment of their home in Khaldiya in Homs city.

Can someone spoiler it. I'm on my phone and for some reason I'm not able to do it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
sun_tzu said:
Israel taken any?
They don't seem to be shown on the map
Click to expand...

Israel hasn't taken any refugees so far. I think it would be impossible even if it wanted because people seeking asylum here would never be able to go back even if they wanted without being branded collaborators with "the Zionist regime". Thousands of Syrians have been treated in Israeli hospitals over the last 4 years, and this has already brought accusations from the Syrian authorities that the Zionists assists AQ.
 
holyland red said:
Israel hasn't taken any refugees so far. I think it would be impossible even if it wanted because people seeking asylum here would never be able to go back even if they wanted without being branded collaborators with "the Zionist regime". Thousands of Syrians have been treated in Israeli hospitals over the last 4 years, and this has already brought accusations from the Syrian authorities that the Zionists assists AQ.
Click to expand...

I saw a documentary recently on a controversial train line built by Israel in Jerusalem, to the Wailing Wall IIRC. They interviewed the Mayor of Jerusalem and asked him how Israel could let the Palestinian people suffer in abject poverty on their side of town, he said 'you know that there are no Jewish refugees in the world, any Jewish refugee will be granted citizenship in Israel.' His implication was that Muslims don't look after other Muslims so why should they.

I was taken aback by how cold and direct he was.
 
holyland red said:
Israel hasn't taken any refugees so far. I think it would be impossible even if it wanted because people seeking asylum here would never be able to go back even if they wanted without being branded collaborators with "the Zionist regime". Thousands of Syrians have been treated in Israeli hospitals over the last 4 years, and this has already brought accusations from the Syrian authorities that the Zionists assists AQ.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure the syrian authorities (who to my understanding have used barrel bombs and chlorine gas on civilian populations) should be dictating Israels or indeed any other countries response.
I'm presuming its a when and not an if the UK takes 100k - 250k refugees in the coming weeks but we have no expectation of many ever going home - and certainly not until the Assad regime and IS are vanquished from the region - so the fact that IS may accuse any who come to the UK (and indeed Assad may) of collaborating with the enemy I don't think that's a valid reason for us not to take people... it may be a convenient reason if the government does not want to take people but I don't feel it should ever be a valid one... after all I'm sure the Nazi's would not look favourably on the Jewish or those attempting to help them flee favourably but that in its self would have been a pretty poor reason to turn away refugees in the second world war - (not that more couldn't have been done to help of course).
Saudi would seem to be the other country that could and should help out more where they can and perhaps the rest of the world will have to act by placing a levy on oil from there or something similar and make it more financially attractive to help rather than sit on the sidelines... or place full trade and arms embargo's on both regimes until they find a little humanity in their hearts.
Whatever the solution is its going to involve countries around the world working together - I fully expect the UK to be part of that - I would hope that Israel and Saudi would be as well. (presumably they can just threaten to take the world cup of quatar and suddenly they will find some way to help?).
Lebenon and Turkey need help quick though as there is no way they can cope with those kind of numbers - I wonder if the USA will do anything meaningful (I'm almost certain they wont take a lot of refugees which in its self is quite shameful but will they even make a telling financial contribution... or at the very least use their soft or perhaps not quite so soft power to get Saudi and Israel to step up)
 
Classical Mechanic said:
I saw a documentary recently on a controversial train line built by Israel in Jerusalem, to the Wailing Wall IIRC. They interviewed the Mayor of Jerusalem and asked him how Israel could let the Palestinian people suffer in abject poverty on their side of town, he said 'you know that there are no Jewish refugees in the world, any Jewish refugee will be granted citizenship in Israel.' His implication was that Muslims don't look after other Muslims so why should they.

I was taken aback by how cold and direct he was.
Click to expand...

You covered it all here, really. What's controversial about the Jerusalem light train line, which is used by the entire Jerusalem population? Obviously the vast majority don't use it for getting to the old city anyway, let alone the Western Wall?

Let's try not to derail this thread into another Israeli-Arab conflict one. I will refer to what you referred to as "his implication" by suggesting an alternative one. The Palestinian "refugees" living in poverty in the WB and Jerusalem have lived under Arab rule for 19 years, and most of them are descendants of the 1948 war. Nowhere in the world people in their status (or any 1940's refugees for that matter) qualify as refugees by any UN agency. That includes the millions of Jewish refugees from the Arab world and Europe.
 
holyland red said:
You covered it all here, really. What's controversial about the Jerusalem light train line, which is used by the entire Jerusalem population? Obviously the vast majority don't use it for getting to the old city anyway, let alone the Western Wall?

Let's try not to derail this thread into another Israeli-Arab conflict one. I will refer to what you referred to as "his implication" by suggesting an alternative one. The Palestinian "refugees" living in poverty in the WB and Jerusalem have lived under Arab rule for 19 years, and most of them are descendants of the 1948 war. Nowhere in the world people in their status (or any 1940's refugees for that matter) qualify as refugees by any UN agency. That includes the millions of Jewish refugees from the Arab world and Europe.
Click to expand...

"During the Naka, Zionis militia and terrorist gangs such as the Irgun and Stern Gang destroyed or demolished about 531 Palestinian villages. They forced 750,000 Palestinians into exile and killed another 13, 000. Below are some little-known facts about Palestinian refugees.

Palestinian refugees and those called internally displaced persons (IDP) represent the largest and longest-standing case of forced displacement in the world today, according to Badil Resource Center for Palestinian Residency & Refugee Rights. Palestinians were forced into exile and therefore refugee status during al-Nakba in 1948 when Zionist militants forced 750,000 Palestinians from their homes. Another 350,000 Palestinians were displaced when Israel illegally seized their land during the Six Day War in 1967.

  • 40 percent of the refugees in the world today are Palestinian
  • Palestinian refugees or internally displaced persons make up 74 percent of the total Palestinian population of more than 9 million.
  • More than 6 million Palestinians are considered refugees from 1948 (includes descendants)
  • 950,000 Palestinians are considered refugees from 1967
  • 80 percent of all Palestinian refugees live outside camps operated by the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA)
    (That's why the number of refugees given by the UN is lower than the actual number of refugees.
  • More than 33 percent of registered refugees are under the age of 15
  • About 4.6 million refugees registered with the United Nations Relief and Works Agency in 2008. Nearly one-third of them live in 58 recognized refugee camps in Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip."
 
sun_tzu said:
I'm not sure the syrian authorities (who to my understanding have used barrel bombs and chlorine gas on civilian populations) should be dictating Israels or indeed any other countries response.
I'm presuming its a when and not an if the UK takes 100k - 250k refugees in the coming weeks but we have no expectation of many ever going home - and certainly not until the Assad regime and IS are vanquished from the region - so the fact that IS may accuse any who come to the UK (and indeed Assad may) of collaborating with the enemy I don't think that's a valid reason for us not to take people... it may be a convenient reason if the government does not want to take people but I don't feel it should ever be a valid one... after all I'm sure the Nazi's would not look favourably on the Jewish or those attempting to help them flee favourably but that in its self would have been a pretty poor reason to turn away refugees in the second world war - (not that more couldn't have been done to help of course).
Saudi would seem to be the other country that could and should help out more where they can and perhaps the rest of the world will have to act by placing a levy on oil from there or something similar and make it more financially attractive to help rather than sit on the sidelines... or place full trade and arms embargo's on both regimes until they find a little humanity in their hearts.
Whatever the solution is its going to involve countries around the world working together - I fully expect the UK to be part of that - I would hope that Israel and Saudi would be as well. (presumably they can just threaten to take the world cup of quatar and suddenly they will find some way to help?).
Lebenon and Turkey need help quick though as there is no way they can cope with those kind of numbers - I wonder if the USA will do anything meaningful (I'm almost certain they wont take a lot of refugees which in its self is quite shameful but will they even make a telling financial contribution... or at the very least use their soft or perhaps not quite so soft power to get Saudi and Israel to step up)
Click to expand...

It's pretty naive to think that the fate of people seeking refuge in Israel would be similar to that of people choosing the UK. It's also naive at best to compare the UK opening its doors for refugees to Israel accepting masses of civilians from a country that is effectively an enemy still. If you do your homework properly you'll find that the Nazis initially let the Jews flee, after confiscating their belongings obviously, but that didn't encourage many to allow those refugees in.

Then you go on saying Saudi is the "other" country which should join in helping. Are you seriously comparing the role Israel and Saudi Arabia could play in helping Sunni Syrian refugees? C'mon...

Lastly, the UK is never going to take in 250,000 refugees from Syria, e-petitions or not.
 
holyland red said:
It's pretty naive to think that the fate of people seeking refuge in Israel would be similar to that of people choosing the UK. It's also naive at best to compare the UK opening its doors for refugees to Israel accepting masses of civilians from a country that is effectively an enemy still. If you do your homework properly you'll find that the Nazis initially let the Jews flee, after confiscating their belongings obviously, but that didn't encourage many to allow those refugees in.

Then you go on saying Saudi is the "other" country which should join in helping. Are you seriously comparing the role Israel and Saudi Arabia could play in helping Sunni Syrian refugees? C'mon...

Lastly, the UK is never going to take in 250,000 refugees from Syria, e-petitions or not.
Click to expand...

No Im talking about stopping people dying I dont think it matters what religion or country they are from
 
holyland red said:
Israel hasn't taken any refugees so far. I think it would be impossible even if it wanted because people seeking asylum here would never be able to go back even if they wanted without being branded collaborators with "the Zionist regime". Thousands of Syrians have been treated in Israeli hospitals over the last 4 years, and this has already brought accusations from the Syrian authorities that the Zionists assists AQ.
Click to expand...

Israel would (by law) accept any of the refugees who could prove they have a maternal 'Jewish' bloodline.

But let's not talk about constitutional racism.
 
The title of this thread needs changing now. Its no longer about Calais. Its about the mass movement of people into Europe as a whole now. And indeed the lack of movement to Saudi!
 
rednev said:
Israel would (by law) accept any of the refugees who could prove they have a maternal 'Jewish' bloodline.

But let's not talk about constitutional racism.
Click to expand...

Non-Jews have persecuted those who have "Jewish bloodline" for two millenia. The recreation of the Jewish State has helped to put an end to that pathological habit.

But let's get back on topic. Israel has more illegal African immigrants than the UK, per capita. Additionally, Israel has nothing to do with the mess that Lybia, Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria are. But let's not talk about that either.
 
rednev said:
Israel would (by law) accept any of the refugees who could prove they have a maternal 'Jewish' bloodline.

But let's not talk about constitutional racism.
Click to expand...
Im sure Adam and Eve is generally a shared concept in most abrahamic religions so wouldn't they consider we all have a jewish bloodline?
 
holyland red said:
Non-Jews have persecuted those who have "Jewish bloodline" for two millenia. The recreation of the Jewish State has helped to put an end to that pathological habit.

But let's get back on topic. Israel has more illegal African immigrants than the UK, per capita. Additionally, Israel has nothing to do with the mess that Lybia, Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria are. But let's not talk about that either.
Click to expand...

No lets talk about people dying just over the border where chlorine gas is used on civilians by both sides and one side uses rape as a tactic whilst the other uses barrel bombs... wouldnt the humane thing be to open your borders and make refugee camps / safe areas?... and not just Israel of course but given you share a land border its a pretty obvious place to look for some sanctuary isnt it - lets face it your standing in the world and particularly the arab world is not going to go down any further by helping people and saving lives.


by all means correct me if I'm wrong but 5 countries share a land border with syria?

turkey - taken 1.8m refugees
lebanon - taken 1.2m refugees
jordan - taken 625,000 refugees
iraq (which is undergoing the same ISIS problems ) taken 240,000
israel - taken 0
 
Last edited:
Jippy said:
Not sure it was because of the petition tbf. Not very democratic if it is cos 0.1% of the population signed it.
Click to expand...

It was because the issue had become politically poisonous for him though, with the outpouring of compassion coming from the pictures of the young boy who lost his life.
 
Uzz said:
Israel will only serve the interests of the Jews and no one else. Considering living in Gaza is akin to living in one huge refugee camp, I'm surprised some of you are surprised at their stance.
Click to expand...
Sadly I'm not surprised
I'm disgusted but not surprised.

when Lebanon implodes under the weight of refugees and the infrastructure collapses under the burden (currently about 25% of total population) Israel will have a far bigger problem as all of a sudden I don't see a million people moving en masse back to a warzone... what their reaction will be at that point though is anybody's guess - probably a fek load of landmines around the border areas is more likely than a safe zone with shelter and food... you know refuge for refugees.
 
Jippy said:
Possibly, but there are plenty adamant they don't want to take loads of them in.
Click to expand...

I think that as a developed Western nation and one of the largest economies in the world , it is a lot harder for us to say that credibly, than say, Greece or Hungary. It was getting to the point where the Tories were being seen as too 'nasty'.
 
sun_tzu said:
No lets talk about people dying just over the border where chlorine gas is used on civilians by both sides and one side uses rape as a tactic whilst the other uses barrel bombs... wouldnt the humane thing be to open your borders and make refugee camps / safe areas?... and not just Israel of course but given you share a land border its a pretty obvious place to look for some sanctuary isnt it - lets face it your standing in the world and particularly the arab world is not going to go down any further by helping people and saving lives.


by all means correct me if I'm wrong but 5 countries share a land border with syria?

turkey - taken 1.8m refugees
lebanon - taken 1.2m refugees
jordan - taken 625,000 refugees
iraq (which is undergoing the same ISIS problems ) taken 240,000
israel - taken 0
Click to expand...

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-31449362

https://news.vice.com/article/inside-the-hospital-where-israeli-doctors-treat-syrian-patients

There are no ISIS forces anywhere near the Syrian-Israeli border.

No Syrian refugee would be safe going back having seeking refuge in Israel.

Israel and Syria are still enemy states- Are you seriously suggesting Israel takes 100,000s refugees from Syria? This must be some kind of joke. I would still fully support accepting Kurdish refugees on the grounds that they generally don't consider themselves Israel's enemies, and they wouldn't face reprisals if they decided to go back to Kurdistan.
 
sun_tzu said:
Sadly I'm not surprised
I'm disgusted but not surprised.

when Lebanon implodes under the weight of refugees and the infrastructure collapses under the burden (currently about 25% of total population) Israel will have a far bigger problem as all of a sudden I don't see a million people moving en masse back to a warzone... what their reaction will be at that point though is anybody's guess - probably a fek load of landmines around the border areas is more likely than a safe zone with shelter and food... you know refuge for refugees.
Click to expand...

Landmines are a pretty good idea for stopping millions of Arabs marching into Israel
 
Classical Mechanic said:
I think that as a developed Western nation and one of the largest economies in the world , it is a lot harder for us to say that credibly, than say, Greece or Hungary. It was getting to the point where the Tories were being seen as too 'nasty'.
Click to expand...
I don't think its 'nasty' to worry about the numbers coming into the UK when net migration was 380k or whatever last year. Asylum policy shouldn't be based on one very sad photo either.

Uzz said:
Doctor treats patient. Mind = blown.

You've posted that link about a dozen times in the last few months, @holyland red.

Just admit it doesn't serve your Zionist nation any benefit to accept Muslim refugees. You wouldn't want anyone else settling in all that land after all.

All this bleating is just a smokescreen.
Click to expand...
Tbf, I doubt Muslim countries would be falling over themselves to welcome Jewish refugees if the roles were reversed.
 
holyland red said:
Landmines are a pretty good idea for stopping millions of Arabs marching into Israel
Click to expand...
so you would rather set up landmines to kill refugees because they are arabs than offer shelter and help to refugees...
honestly I will never understand you - but seriously look at what you have written and think how you would react if somebody suggested blowing up Jews who were desperate for help rather than help them?

landmines...
syrian_refugee_crisis.jpg

whats wrong with you
 
Israel's is wrong but, given the history, their reluctance is understandable. Surely more disgusting is the apathy shown by the rich, Muslim states like Saudi, Qatar et al.
 
VP said:
Israel's is wrong but, given the history, their reluctance is understandable. Surely more disgusting is the apathy shown by the rich, Muslim states like Saudi, Qatar et al.
Click to expand...
its as disgusting... though they don't share a land border so I would expect them to receive less refugees initially just because of geography- but certainly they should be helping and as you say they certainly have the money to be able to something meaningful.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.