Chilloutman

turn on subs:

2015 there was 32 477 people that seek asylum from Finland from these 14 656 were denied and sent away, most left voluntary, 7806 got refugee status, in 2128 cases person left from country before their processing was over, 3252 cases application expired before process was over. 4635 cases is still without resolution. EDIT: Added cases without resolution So you basically agree that most of 'refugees' are actually not refugees even in Finland (8000 given status against 25000 claiming it). Now imagine how that ratio looks in Germany, not to mention France or Italy... All refugees are refugees, but most asylum seekers aren't in situation that merits refugee status. Now its only word play, c'mon you know what I mean

2015 there was 32 477 people that seek asylum from Finland from these 14 656 were denied and sent away, most left voluntary, 7806 got refugee status, in 2128 cases person left from country before their processing was over, 3252 cases application expired before process was over. 4635 cases is still without resolution. EDIT: Added cases without resolution So you basically agree that most of 'refugees' are actually not refugees even in Finland (8000 given status against 25000 claiming it). Now imagine how that ratio looks in Germany, not to mention France or Italy...

But question was about people that are determined in case of deportation to more likely to die because of persecution, war or some other cause known before hand than live to die from old age aka legally determined refugees. Meaning that "will" is more probable in their case than mere "possibility". yeah sure, all of the refugees are gays Homosexuality is quite rare as reason why people get refugee status (I think it was reason for less than 100 from those 40k). Usually it is political, religious, or general war in their residential area. But that don't change the fact that risk of dying in their home country is the determining factor when it comes to getting or not getting refugee status. And when that risk is lowered enough said refugees are meant to be sent back to their home countries, but in cases where people have been in Finland for decades they usually get residence permit and possibility to seek citizenship, when they lose their refugee status. We have been over this multiple times. These people usually even don't have any ID. Everyone can 'say' he is being persecuted for any reason mentioned above and you will be never able to verify such claim People that our officials can't determine to face persecution or some other form certain threat in their home country don't get refugee status. Yes there is probably some people that are able to get refugee status by lying to our officials but all the studies about subject say that if it is so it is very rare. People who seek refugee status are interviewed and investigated, by police, immigrant official, national security officials, social officials, psychologist, doctors in process that takes over a year. It isn't easy to become refugee in Finland especially if you entered here illegally without papers. And how many of these who didn't get that status were ACTUALLY deported? I mean I don't follow Finland much but in Germany they usually just disappear Last year over 10k Doesn't sound that much compared to how many you get in (not to mention that they should be deported to first save country anyway)

But question was about people that are determined in case of deportation to more likely to die because of persecution, war or some other cause known before hand than live to die from old age aka legally determined refugees. Meaning that "will" is more probable in their case than mere "possibility". yeah sure, all of the refugees are gays Homosexuality is quite rare as reason why people get refugee status (I think it was reason for less than 100 from those 40k). Usually it is political, religious, or general war in their residential area. But that don't change the fact that risk of dying in their home country is the determining factor when it comes to getting or not getting refugee status. And when that risk is lowered enough said refugees are meant to be sent back to their home countries, but in cases where people have been in Finland for decades they usually get residence permit and possibility to seek citizenship, when they lose their refugee status. We have been over this multiple times. These people usually even don't have any ID. Everyone can 'say' he is being persecuted for any reason mentioned above and you will be never able to verify such claim People that our officials can't determine to face persecution or some other form certain threat in their home country don't get refugee status. Yes there is probably some people that are able to get refugee status by lying to our officials but all the studies about subject say that if it is so it is very rare. People who seek refugee status are interviewed and investigated, by police, immigrant official, national security officials, social officials, psychologist, doctors in process that takes over a year. It isn't easy to become refugee in Finland especially if you entered here illegally without papers. And how many of these who didn't get that status were ACTUALLY deported? I mean I don't follow Finland much but in Germany they usually just disappear

But question was about people that are determined in case of deportation to more likely to die because of persecution, war or some other cause known before hand than live to die from old age aka legally determined refugees. Meaning that "will" is more probable in their case than mere "possibility". yeah sure, all of the refugees are gays Homosexuality is quite rare as reason why people get refugee status (I think it was reason for less than 100 from those 40k). Usually it is political, religious, or general war in their residential area. But that don't change the fact that risk of dying in their home country is the determining factor when it comes to getting or not getting refugee status. And when that risk is lowered enough said refugees are meant to be sent back to their home countries, but in cases where people have been in Finland for decades they usually get residence permit and possibility to seek citizenship, when they lose their refugee status. We have been over this multiple times. These people usually even don't have any ID. Everyone can 'say' he is being persecuted for any reason mentioned above and you will be never able to verify such claim

But question was about people that are determined in case of deportation to more likely to die because of persecution, war or some other cause known before hand than live to die from old age aka legally determined refugees. Meaning that "will" is more probable in their case than mere "possibility". yeah sure, all of the refugees are gays

Refugees aren't never illegal, because to be refugee you need to be legally recognized as such, but asylum seekers are technically illegal until they get refugee status, residence permit for some other reason or are deported. But situation isn't all that simple because people may also have residence permit in another EU country which may or may not allow them to travel to other EU countries and if their permit don't allow them to travel they aren't counted as illegal immigrants put people that break their residence permit in another EU country and they should be returned there. Technically they are all illegal and they break a law. According to international law they should stay in first safe country

and that

But it is rephrasing what you said "Well its your view. I for one would vouch for 40K people from Africa to go back with posibility to die than let anyone from my circle get raped. And I am not ashamed of it." http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/91622-politics-2017-part-3/page-17?do=findComment&comment=1889867 And where is the contradiction? Yeah that is the question that I am asking I think you need to be little more clear. I don't know what you mean by all of this Where is contraction between in my rephrasing and what you said? I mean you would sent 40k people with actual refugee status face near certain death (determined by officials that gave them that refugee status) instead of letting anybody in your circle get raped, how that is different from "Both the victims and attacker were asylum seekers and therefore need to be get rid off. Isn't that what people here have been campaign for? Better let them to die than let any harm to come for actual Germans (or in case of some other European country, that country's citizens)" Or would it had been better if that family had been sent back to Iraq where they would most likely had been raped and killed by ISIS fighters, not that their faith was much better in Germany. Ehh, so result is same but Germans have to pay for it. There is actually great chance that in their home country he would just killed that freak and he would be still alive, I don't think that family is now better than it would be in home country or some refugee camp

But it is rephrasing what you said "Well its your view. I for one would vouch for 40K people from Africa to go back with posibility to die than let anyone from my circle get raped. And I am not ashamed of it." http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/91622-politics-2017-part-3/page-17?do=findComment&comment=1889867 And where is the contradiction? Yeah that is the question that I am asking I think you need to be little more clear. I don't know what you mean by all of this

That's sick, and no, I am against killing no matter who the person is. You are mixing deportation with lynching. And I am not against immigrants, I am against illegal immigrants and so called refugees. But I know its hard to distinguished for some people who thinks that anyone against immigration is actually nazi But it is rephrasing what you said "Well its your view. I for one would vouch for 40K people from Africa to go back with posibility to die than let anyone from my circle get raped. And I am not ashamed of it." http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/91622-politics-2017-part-3/page-17?do=findComment&comment=1889867 And where is the contradiction?

That's sick, and no, I am against killing no matter who the person is. You are mixing deportation with lynching. And I am not against immigrants, I am against illegal immigrants and so called refugees. But I know its hard to distinguished for some people who thinks that anyone against immigration is actually nazi

he was not attacking police but someone who was raping his daughter, I am pretty sure it could been handled differently.... and these 22 months are conditioned so he is not even going into jail and he is not deported. There is just walking on streets in Germany guy who raped 6 year old girl. Am I only one who thinks this is ridiculous?

http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/767521/pakistani-immigrant-sex-abuse-rape-girl-Germany-suspended-jail-sentence so rapist got 22 months of jail for rape! And police shot father of 6 year old victim because he was trying to protect his child with knife new level of German justice

Thats common saying in czech: ''Hunger is just disguised thirst''

I am baffled around constitutions. I mean some of them are hundreds years old, its quite clear that they need to be updated from time to time?

its free

I know, not that trustworthy for some folks but still:

Hey mods, can't you somehow limit number of 'quotes' or replies in one post, seems like some people are unable to control this basic function enough, by this rate we will have one post on one page Edit: Kudos to Bruce that he actually started to do it

OK dude, one more and you are off my ignore list xD

http://www.politico.eu/article/marine-le-pen-cancels-mufti-meeting-over-headscarf/

Do you know what new happen that riots started? Swedish police arrested somebody and people with masks started riot by throwing rocks towards police. It ended when police shot towards rioters. And later in same evening people started to riot again by breaking shop windows, burning cars and they battered some people. Police estimates that about 30-50 people were behind the riots. Police is investigating three claims of rioting, two claims of battering, several cases of theft and vandalism EDIT: More details what Swedish police said about riots in their press conference. Edit2: People seem to be angry about their life and said arrest seems to have worked as convenient excuse to release that anger in the violent and nonconstructive way that is typical for some people regardless of their origin. Hmm ok thanks for info

Do you know what new happen that riots started?