IMMIGRATION thread

**Papewaio** · 02-09-2016, 07:32

Originally Posted by Beskar

Hey look, it is my avatar.

Certainly rings a bell.

I'll show my way out now.

**HopAlongBunny** · 02-09-2016, 07:47

hmmm,

Dog + Bell

Why am i drooling!?

**Fragony** · 02-12-2016, 07:44

Happy New Year Germa y thread was merged here as well? Can't find it.

Anyways, je n'est pas Charlie, but this cartoon is pretty brilliant http://www.theguardian.com/media/201...-racism-debate

I know it's offensive but sarcasm should be

**Greyblades** · 02-12-2016, 16:12

To quote imablogger from a guardian comment section:

The poor boy was killed by his fathers greed

Then his image was used to justify uncontrolled migration, which the right didn't like.

Now his image is used to justify a sexual stereotype, which the left don't like.

But don't try to stifle either view because if you do you stifle free speech

**Fragony** · 02-12-2016, 16:29

If I would be really cynical I would be having a laugh over the latest icon, but I really can't do that as I only feel sorry for that kid. Who is cynical really, not me imho. True story is really ugly.

**Husar** · 02-12-2016, 19:52

Originally Posted by Greyblades

The poor boy was killed by his fathers greed

How do we know this?

http://www.theguardian.com/world/201...efugee-tragedy

How de we know he is greedy from his story?

**Greyblades** · 02-12-2016, 20:03

I'm not sure how he got to that conclusion either, I was tempted to leave out that bit but I decided to present the quote in full.

Edit/ It might relate with the top comments of your article:

"It's unclear why The Guardian is running this article if they are unwilling to establish any facts about the case. Had the family been living in Turkey for years? Had they been given an apartment? If so, why did this gentleman choose to endanger the lives of his children?
There may be answers to these questions, but if a newspaper refuses to even ask them they are failing in their first duty."

"This man was not a refugee; he was an economic migrant who endangered the lives of his family through the dishonest circumvention of the immigration and refugee rules in place in Europe: and rules to which everyone is subject, including people more deserving than this opportunist. I am sorry that he lost his family, but the responsibility for this is his and his alone: it is certainly not the responsibility of Europe or the World, and it is certainly not my responsibility. I do not think that there is anything more to say, other than that I found the sentimental wallowing of the world over the indecently exhibited images of a dead child, and prior to any proper investigation of the facts of the case, a depraved and sickening betrayal of all accepted standards of journalistic ethics."

**Husar** · 02-12-2016, 22:51

Originally Posted by Greyblades

I'm not sure how he got to that conclusion either, I was tempted to leave out that bit but I decided to present the quote in full.

Edit/ It might relate with the top comments of your article:

"It's unclear why The Guardian is running this article if they are unwilling to establish any facts about the case. Had the family been living in Turkey for years? Had they been given an apartment? If so, why did this gentleman choose to endanger the lives of his children?
There may be answers to these questions, but if a newspaper refuses to even ask them they are failing in their first duty."

"This man was not a refugee; he was an economic migrant who endangered the lives of his family through the dishonest circumvention of the immigration and refugee rules in place in Europe: and rules to which everyone is subject, including people more deserving than this opportunist. I am sorry that he lost his family, but the responsibility for this is his and his alone: it is certainly not the responsibility of Europe or the World, and it is certainly not my responsibility. I do not think that there is anything more to say, other than that I found the sentimental wallowing of the world over the indecently exhibited images of a dead child, and prior to any proper investigation of the facts of the case, a depraved and sickening betrayal of all accepted standards of journalistic ethics."

Took a bit of searching, but apparently there is some controversy:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ook-world.html

The following quote may explain why they moved though, I also don't quite see how a life of a criminal in Turkey is basically seen as a perfectly viable alternative while we do not want anyone working illegally here.

It is a question which has haunted all who knew the Kurdis. One significant factor may well have been the difficulties which would have lain ahead for Aylan and his brother in getting access to education or health care in Turkey, where their prospects as both Syrian refugees and Kurds were doubly blighted.

He was basically on the pursuit of happiness, isn't that an inherent western value/right of a person?