Migrant watch (merged topic)

biffvernon · Post by **biffvernon** » 07 Sep 2015, 19:03

kenneal - lagger wrote:... and then, ... completely forget the original crisis and deny its existence! Beggars belief!!

Yes it would beggar belief if it were true. Fortunately, it is false.

Catweazle · Post by **Catweazle** » 07 Sep 2015, 19:40

johnhemming2 wrote:
Catweazle wrote:
johnhemming2 wrote:Exactly - not just rubble. I don't think even the atom bombs did that to the whole city.
Looks like rubble to me, even though some of it is in building-shaped piles.

You certainly wouldn't want to live there.
It depends where in Homs. If you look at photos from the last week it is clear that not all of Homs is rubble.

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=image ... &tbs=qdr:w

Having clicked on the link and seen pictures of a destroyed city, I was confused, so I ran your post through my "Political Bullshit Filter", the results are below, for the benefit of other members:

Results wrote:

johnhemming2 · Post by **johnhemming2** » 07 Sep 2015, 19:44

It is sad that your political bias leads you not to search out truth. This photo is from 25th August 2015.

https://www.facebook.com/LensYoungHomsi ... 51/?type=1

Catweazle · Post by **Catweazle** » 07 Sep 2015, 20:33

johnhemming2 wrote:It is sad that your political bias leads you not to search out truth. This photo is from 25th August 2015.

https://www.facebook.com/LensYoungHomsi ... 51/?type=1

Unreal. You post a link to a single picture to support your case, and that picture contains possibly five buildings, three of which look very damaged. There is a handsome minaret, but if you look closely you can see only the re-bar is holding it up as the concrete has been blown off.

The picture contains 3 UN vehicles - perhaps it's the safest place in Homs - and what could be a pool of blood on the road.

We don't need spin here, Homs is a wreck and you know it.

johnhemming2 · Post by **johnhemming2** » 07 Sep 2015, 21:38

Catweazle wrote:We don't need spin here, Homs is a wreck and you know it.

Homs may be a wreck, but it is not all rubble. It is possible to live in some of the buildings in Homs.

biffvernon · Post by **biffvernon** » 07 Sep 2015, 21:52

Homs is not all rubble. There is a minaret that leans only about as much as the Leaning Tower of Pisa. Doh.

Alleppo appears to be an equal haven of peace and tranquillity for there too stands a minaret.

johnhemming2 · Post by **johnhemming2** » 07 Sep 2015, 22:36

Not all rubble. Possibly a majority rubble, but not all rubble. It is best to try to be accurate.

Here is an interesting story from yesterday about Aleppo
http://www.opb.org/artsandlife/article/ ... r-from-dc/

I am not saying everything is perfect. I am saying it is worth trying to be accurate as to how you describe a given situation.

biffvernon · Post by **biffvernon** » 07 Sep 2015, 22:51

johnhemming2 wrote:Not all rubble. Possibly a majority rubble, but not all rubble. It is best to try to be accurate.

I never used the word 'all'. But what I did do is post a link to as large a collection as the internet is capable of delivering at one mouse click, of images of Homs so that readers could judge for themselves the state of that city. Do try to be accurate.

biffvernon · Post by **biffvernon** » 07 Sep 2015, 22:55

addy Ashdown ‏@paddyashdown 5h5 hours ago
Minister in the Lords just confirmed refugee orphans and children brought in under Cameron's scheme will be deported at age 18.

We will nurture and care for you, raise and educate you. Then, on your 18th birthday, we will send you to the slaughter. ‪#‎nationaldisgrace‬

Post by **kenneal - lagger** » 08 Sep 2015, 04:54

I would think that Cameron was working on the basis that any young children bought here and educated would be able to return to a peaceful Syria by the time they were 18.

If, however, we didn't resort to any bombing because it's dangerous we might find that Syria wouldn't be a safe place for them to return to when they were 80 let alone 18!

johnhemming2 · Post by **johnhemming2** » 08 Sep 2015, 07:21

biffvernon wrote:
johnhemming2 wrote:Not all rubble. Possibly a majority rubble, but not all rubble. It is best to try to be accurate.
I never used the word 'all'. But what I did do is post a link to as large a collection as the internet is capable of delivering at one mouse click, of images of Homs so that readers could judge for themselves the state of that city. Do try to be accurate.

biffvernon wrote:I have no idea what it is like to have lived in a city which in now just rubble covering the bodies of one's neighbours.

"just rubble" ="only rubble" = "all rubble".

biffvernon · Post by **biffvernon** » 08 Sep 2015, 08:03

kenneal - lagger wrote:I would think that Cameron was working on the basis that any young children bought here and educated would be able to return to a peaceful Syria by the time they were 18.

If, however, we didn't resort to any bombing because it's dangerous we might find that Syria wouldn't be a safe place for them to return to when they were 80 let alone 18!

It seems to me that when we go and drop bombs on people there is a tendency for such places not to become peaceful very quickly. But don't let's learn the lessons of history.

biffvernon · Post by **biffvernon** » 08 Sep 2015, 09:03

From this morning's Independent:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world ... 90425.html

Patrick Cockburn wrote:in the vast swathe of territory between the Hindu Kush mountains and the western side of the Sahara, religious, ethnic and separatist conflicts are tearing countries apart. Everywhere states are collapsing, weakening or are under attack; and, in many of these places, extreme Sunni Islamist insurgencies are on the rise which use terror against civilians in order to provoke mass flight.

Another feature of these wars is that none of them show any sign of ending, so people cannot go back to their homes. Most Syrian refugees who fled to Turkey, Lebanon and Jordan in 2011 and 2012, believed the war in Syria would soon be over and they could return. It is only in the last couple of years that they have realised that this is not going to happen and they must seek permanent sanctuary elsewhere. The very length of these wars means immense and irreversible destruction of all means of making a living, so refugees, who at first just sought safety, are also driven by economic necessity.

And you really think, Ken, that dropping bombs is the answer?

biffvernon · Post by **biffvernon** » 08 Sep 2015, 09:22

There's a line in Patrick Cockburn's article warning against ascribing the problems to climate change, but in this article published a couple of months ago, Peter Mellgard presents the case from a different perspective:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/mig ... 84e275d514

And Craig Bennett writes on migration and climate in yesterday's Guardian:
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/ ... gee-crisis

Little John · Post by **Little John** » 08 Sep 2015, 13:05

"Can you spot the war that's coming"

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/wa ... re-6381894