Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Disciple of Fate wrote:
I can call people crossing the Med refugees all I want until we establish that those people are migrants and not refugees.

Again you post easily refutable information about '80%'. Here is a source, enjoy: http://data2.unhcr.org/en/situations/mediterranean
Notice that the first 5 countries of origin or 55.5% of arrivals are from Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Nigeria or Eritria. Now led me just quickly go over those countries. Syria=war, Iraq=war, Afghanistan=war, Nigeria=violence in northern Nigeria, Eritrea=dictatorship. These people could all easily apply for refugee status and receive it. This blows you 80% claim out of the water without me even going on to bother examining the remaining 44.5%.

Do us all a favour, put 10 minutes into google before you post, it could save all of us a lot of effort.

I believe in the opposite, they're illegals until they prove to be refugees. I can join them in one of those ships, but I wouldn't be a refugee for a single moment.

And I still don't understand why it was ok to pay billions to turkey to keep the illegals in awful condition that are comparable to nazi camps and it's outrageous to think that our african allies can't do the same thing. Western societies are based on the USA which have invaded whatever they wanted. But maybe for you it's ok to keep the head under the sand and do nothing to stop wars and atrocities at the borders of our countries, like the dutch onu soldiers did in bosnia. Those blue helmets were not different and less guilty to karadzic and his friends. Western countries are still fighting in afghanistan and even against the ISIS in syria, but only staying in the backfield and bombing sometimes, which in my opinion it's more hypocrite than not fighting at all. Help the legit lybian government to rebuild that country has nothing against western values.

Do your numbers refer to their real nationalities or those ones they claim to have?

Any single article that talk about this matter in my country show different numbers. People from syria and iraq for example are extremely uncommon here despite what that article says, many illegals come from morocco, tunisia, pakistan and bangladesh other to central african countries.

Your article about mixed couple can be criticized too, because many of those mixed couples are composed by people of the same race. In sweden the biggest minority is the finnish community and I hope you don't consider a family composed by a finnish and a swedish a mixed couple. A family with a dutch and an italian is not mixed by any means, unless the dutch is maybe of suriname origins or the italian has north african parents. For mixed couples I mean couples made of people of different races/ethnic groups, not with different nationalities.

I reported my experience because the sweds I met were extremely nice to me and I love that country, but at the same time I've only witnessed a huge number of non EU foreigners without a single blonde guy/woman with blue eyes with them. Same in denmark, with the exception that they're not particularly friendly even with the EU guys there.

Nigeria=violence in northen nigeria : they have the remaining 90% of their country. If in napoli and mafia strong feuds criminal families start a war or increase the current rate of violence (which is currently quite high already), then the citizens should be considered refugees if they ask the status in north europe?

And here it is people, Blackie dropping it like its hot. Want to apologize for basically trying to call Northern Europeans a bunch of white supremacists or Russia more tolerant than France?

 Blackie wrote:

 Disciple of Fate wrote:
I can call people crossing the Med refugees all I want until we establish that those people are migrants and not refugees.

Again you post easily refutable information about '80%'. Here is a source, enjoy: http://data2.unhcr.org/en/situations/mediterranean
Notice that the first 5 countries of origin or 55.5% of arrivals are from Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Nigeria or Eritria. Now led me just quickly go over those countries. Syria=war, Iraq=war, Afghanistan=war, Nigeria=violence in northern Nigeria, Eritrea=dictatorship. These people could all easily apply for refugee status and receive it. This blows you 80% claim out of the water without me even going on to bother examining the remaining 44.5%.

Do us all a favour, put 10 minutes into google before you post, it could save all of us a lot of effort.

I believe in the opposite, they're illegals until they prove to be refugees. I can join them in one of those ships, but I wouldn't be a refugee for a single moment.

And I still don't understand why it was ok to pay billions to turkey to keep the illegals in awful condition that are comparable to nazi camps and it's outrageous to think that our african allies can't do the same thing. Western societies are based on the USA which have invaded whatever they wanted. But maybe for you it's ok to keep the head under the sand and do nothing to stop wars and atrocities at the borders of our countries, like the dutch onu soldiers did in bosnia. Those blue helmets were not different and less guilty to karadzic and his friends. Western countries are still fighting in afghanistan and even against the ISIS in syria, but only staying in the backfield and bombing sometimes, which in my opinion it's more hypocrite than not fighting at all. Help the legit lybian government to rebuild that country has nothing against western values.

Do your numbers refer to their real nationalities or those ones they claim to have?

Any single article that talk about this matter in my country show different numbers. People from syria and iraq for example are extremely uncommon here despite what that article says, many illegals come from morocco, tunisia, pakistan and bangladesh other to central african countries.

Your article about mixed couple can be criticized too, because many of those mixed couples are composed by people of the same race. In sweden the biggest minority is the finnish community and I hope you don't consider a family composed by a finnish and a swedish a mixed couple. A family with a dutch and an italian is not mixed by any means, unless the dutch is maybe of suriname origins or the italian has north african parents. For mixed couples I mean couples made of people of different races/ethnic groups, not with different nationalities.

I reported my experience because the sweds I met were extremely nice to me and I love that country, but at the same time I've only witnessed a huge number of non EU foreigners without a single blonde guy/woman with blue eyes with them. Same in denmark, with the exception that they're not particularly friendly even with the EU guys there.

Nigeria=violence in northen nigeria : they have the remaining 90% of their country. If in napoli and mafia strong feuds criminal families start a war or increase the current rate of violence (which is currently quite high already), then the citizens should be considered refugees if they ask the status in north europe?

What you believe or not is irrelevant. Until you can prove these people aren't refugees you can't pretend any of them aren't refugees. And I would advise you join them on one of those boats, it might teach you something about empathy.

The Turkey deal is still very controversial but the situation there is nowhere near as bad as it would be in Libyan camps. These are not in any way similar to Nazi camps and the casual way you thrown around that word makes it seem like you have no idea what it means or the history behind it. Do you know what happened in Nazi camps? Care to provide evidence this happens in Turkish ones? Western society is based on the fact that the US saved our asses after WWII, of course it was out of self interest, but our whole way of life was preserved from Nazi or communist rule.
Thank you for calling Dutch peacekeepers in Bosnia as responsible as Mladic. This makes me realize how little you know about European history combined with the Nazi comments. Did Dutchbat not do enough to protect these people? Almost certainly. Did they have enough equipment to prevent what happened? Almost certainly not. Read up on history instead of just accusing people of genocide ok?
Furthermore the West has been active on the front line in these countries but eventually decided to pull troops back. Then serious problems arose again and we are trying to solve it with them, not for them. The problem with just going in and enforcing your will on them regarding things like refugees or migrants crossing might mean they get less friendly towards you.

Read my source, it claims their nationality. Furthermore I'm not going to let you equate random articles on refugee numbers with the numbers of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, the premier organization in the world dealing with refugees. This is as close to a perfect source as you're going to get. And despite what your anecdotal evidence says, I still backed up my numbers with more than just my eyeballs (your eyeballs having already discredited with the mixed couples argument).

Look at what the report says, these are mixed couples when considering in which country they were born. This is as close as you can get as migrants/refugees aren't born in Sweden. Also the concept of 'race' is getting more and more outdated as people from North-Africa certainly can be considered the same race as Europeans. Brown however much we like to pretend is not a race. Seriously man you just question my source, but provide no backup whatsoever. You give me a study that proves my study wrong and shows that Italy isn't doing worse than most of Europe. I will be waiting..

You report your extremely biased anecdotal evidence, then pretend this is somehow useful as a valid generalisation for entire countries. I don't know how you were trained in debating techniques or providing compelling arguments, but let me tell you that you as a person are as far away removed from convincing as you can get. If you want us to take your statements at face value and holding any merit, you should start bringing up solid arguments.

Ok great, you point out that Nigerians might not be valid refugees, still not getting anywhere close to '80%' being migrants however. Again you take out a single example in a list of them and try to show you won the debate, its bad form man.

 Disciple of Fate wrote:


Look at what the report says, these are mixed couples when considering in which country they were born. This is as close as you can get as migrants/refugees aren't born in Sweden. Also the concept of 'race' is getting more and more outdated as people from North-Africa certainly can be considered the same race as Europeans. Brown however much we like to pretend is not a race. Seriously man you just question my source, but provide no backup whatsoever. You give me a study that proves my study wrong and shows that Italy isn't doing worse than most of Europe. I will be waiting..

I've only said that I haven't seen mixed couples and mixed groups of friends in sweden but a lot of groups of arabs/africans always among themselves, in any possible place. You basically showed me a study that doesn't deal with that because it only talks about locals and generic foreigners, most of which have a very similar culture to the local one. Find a study that shows how many muslim/christians or atheists are together in rotterdam, in malmoe, molenbeek or luton instead, or any other place. I never said your study was wrong but only that it doesn't deal with what I was saying. And what I was saying is just an impression and an opinion, not the truth. I think that cultures, when are completely different and incompatible, tend to stay separate. That's why you may see a lot of people of foreign origins or actually foreingers, muslims or not, that live like any other resident, having a group of friends (or even a mixed family) that is also composed by locals. I've know several of them where I live/lived. As I said many times it's not a matter of religion or nationality.

But I also think that there are some communities that despise western values and even if they're not terrorists they grow their children with their values, sometimes even illegally like forcing them to wear the veil or locking up in their rooms if they get caught hanging out with western friends. In italy we had three important cases in the last 10 days: a moroccan father that beaten up badly his daughter because he didn't want to wear the veil, a bangladesh family that shaved their head's daughter for the same reason and a sri lanka teenage boy that committed suicide because their parents discovered he had an italian girlfriend and they were planning to arrange his marriage instead. None of these people involved is a terrorist, but any decent democracy can't tolerate cultures like these ones. Now the two girls were taken away from their families and they won't see each other again, and I totally agree about that.

You will never see any articles of studies that report how many muslims behave like these examples.

I think that those people are actually a lot, and I also think that many europeans don't want anything to do with them contributing to keep these communities separated and letting radicalisms grow, but they have to justify their racism saying to everyone that all the illegals are welcome, even if it's not true. A country that allows a nazi march and hate speechs is wrong, there's no freedom of opinions involved here.

The number of radicalized, terrorists, foreign fighters is also influenced on how a country can deal with this issue. Tunisia is a sort of democracy but the majority of the foreign fighters comes from there, because for many muslims a democracy is not tolerable as they wish an islamic state. In countries that let this radicalisms grow a significant number of people decide to flee form that country or commit a terror attack against it. That's entirely on those societies, that do nothing or not enough to fight radicalizations and a also on large part of their citizens that actually doesn't want anything to do with people of different cultures.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Disciple of Fate wrote:


Ok great, you point out that Nigerians might not be valid refugees, still not getting anywhere close to '80%' being migrants however. Again you take out a single example in a list of them and try to show you won the debate, its bad form man.

Make a phone call to any refugee center in italy, they will tell you where these people really come from, once their real nationality is established.

http://www.lenius.it/migranti-2017/

This is in italian but talks about the arrives in 2017, giving the official percentages: their nationalities are guinea, nigeria, bangladesh, gambia, ivory coast, senegal, morocco. In this order. None of this countries is at war.

 Blackie wrote:

 Disciple of Fate wrote:


Look at what the report says, these are mixed couples when considering in which country they were born. This is as close as you can get as migrants/refugees aren't born in Sweden. Also the concept of 'race' is getting more and more outdated as people from North-Africa certainly can be considered the same race as Europeans. Brown however much we like to pretend is not a race. Seriously man you just question my source, but provide no backup whatsoever. You give me a study that proves my study wrong and shows that Italy isn't doing worse than most of Europe. I will be waiting..

I've only said that I haven't seen mixed couples and mixed groups of friends in sweden but a lot of groups of arabs/africans always among themselves, in any possible place. You basically showed me a study that doesn't deal with that because it only talks about locals and generic foreigners, most of which have a very similar culture to the local one. Find a study that shows how many muslim/christians or atheists are together in rotterdam, in malmoe, molenbeek or luton instead, or any other place. I never said your study was wrong but only that it doesn't deal with what I was saying. And what I was saying is just an impression and an opinion, not the truth. I think that cultures, when are completely different and incompatible, tend to stay separate. That's why you may see a lot of people of foreign origins or actually foreingers, muslims or not, that live like any other resident, having a group of friends (or even a mixed family) that is also composed by locals. I've know several of them where I live/lived. As I said many times it's not a matter of religion or nationality.

But I also think that there are some communities that despise western values and even if they're not terrorists they grow their children with their values, sometimes even illegally like forcing them to wear the veil or locking up in their rooms if they get caught hanging out with western friends. In italy we had three important cases in the last 10 days: a moroccan father that beaten up badly his daughter because he didn't want to wear the veil, a bangladesh family that shaved their head's daughter for the same reason and a sri lanka teenage boy that committed suicide because their parents discovered he had an italian girlfriend and they were planning to arrange his marriage instead. None of these people involved is a terrorist, but any decent democracy can't tolerate cultures like these ones. Now the two girls were taken away from their families and they won't see each other again, and I totally agree about that.

You will never see any articles of studies that report how many muslims behave like these examples.

I think that those people are actually a lot, and I also think that many europeans don't want anything to do with them contributing to keep these communities separated and letting radicalisms grow, but they have to justify their racism saying to everyone that all the illegals are welcome, even if it's not true. A country that allows a nazi march and hate speechs is wrong, there's no freedom of opinions involved here.

The number of radicalized, terrorists, foreign fighters is also influenced on how a country can deal with this issue. Tunisia is a sort of democracy but the majority of the foreign fighters comes from there, because for many muslims a democracy is not tolerable as they wish an islamic state. In countries that let this radicalisms grow a significant number of people decide to flee form that country or commit a terror attack against it. That's entirely on those societies, that do nothing or not enough to fight radicalizations and a also on large part of their citizens that actually doesn't want anything to do with people of different cultures.

Seriously, asking me for more sources? That study is perfectly valid as Arabs and Africans are also foreigners. You want studies directly researching a phenomena about marriage from people who have been here barely a few years? Look here is another study about Moroccan and Turkish Dutch population getting married through a study of the population of Amsterdam, where 10% marries an ethnic Dutch person, which correlates to the 10% mixed marriage from the other study, but in fact gets excluded in that one because we all technically have the same Dutch nationality: http://www.fsw.vu.nl/en/Images/huwelijkenamsterdam_Spdf_tcm250-60417.pdf Sure its difficult to show, but this shows that Muslims and non-Muslims marry. Can you prove to me the marriage levels of Muslims and on-Muslims together are lower than Christians and non-Christians however? Lets not pretend that something as influential in someones life as religion won't strongly affect choice of partner. Here is some interfaith marriage news from the UK: http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2012/12/2012122795639455824.html This is the point where you give me some sources to look over backing up your claims.

Of course you are right that there are some communities that despise the West/Western values or something like that, as those communities provide the breeding ground for home grown terrorism. Parents forcing their children to adhere to their religion is something you can certainly find in any religion. Just as an example, we have a political party with a electorate of about 200.000-250.000 of hardcore Christians who didn't think women were mentally fit to serve in politics until it was declared unconstitutional, yet half their voters are women. We can all find these examples of religious parents doing something terrible to their child mainly because we have a lot of unhinged people in the world. Marrying people off is still quite normal even in non-Muslim part of the world as this ensured the parents got a good price for their 'produce'. I certainly agree that these practices should have no place in the Western world as you shouldn't force anyone to marry based on some parental business contract. However the trouble is that you see only the cases they find out about, without being able to know if and if yes how many others there are, but based on the amount of cases seen each year, its a issue in a small subsection of those communities.

The problem with people around the world is that they like hanging around similar people. Dutch people do it on vacation even. Its completely normal for people who just arrived here to want to feel at home and live with others from their country. The problem starts when racism in the professional sphere starts excluding these people for the ones that seem "European". This is also a good reason why integration is failing, most Europeans think its just going fine, but the reality for these people is different. This is what governments should tackle, stricter laws to give equal opportunities. That's how people integrate, when they have the same chances, they might start feeling more at home. You still keep claiming Europe is wrong or racist for allowing free speech, but the truth is these people don't have anywhere near the electoral majority to vote in the anti-immigration parties, as has been demonstrated by the failure of Wilders.

The issue with foreign fighters is that its difficult to ascertain as to why they left, as you can't exactly ask them. Did they go out of actual conviction, to find a place to belong or just because they think its going to be cool (and yes these 'cool' gakheads sadly exist). Again though where religious radicalism ends and where politically motivated religious radicalism begins is a fine line. I would agree that in Europe its mainly focused on the disillusioned and the religion angle to give them a sense of beloning. But when looking at IS in Syria, it quickly starts to shift to a political power grab and less about being a good religious radical. Another issue that compounds radicalism in Europe is that the technological era makes it possible for these young people to get into contact with like minded people without having to alert their direct environment about it. Just think about your parents/children, how good of an idea do you think they have about who exactly they are talking to? You might not even know that the guy you know from work or school might be radicalizing (of course you might if they decide for the whole beard and outfit get-up they sometimes do) because he is only getting radicalized online without any direct contact in the country he is in. That is the problem with radicalization, its incredibly complex and difficult to identify and solve.

 Blackie wrote:

 Disciple of Fate wrote:


Ok great, you point out that Nigerians might not be valid refugees, still not getting anywhere close to '80%' being migrants however. Again you take out a single example in a list of them and try to show you won the debate, its bad form man.

Make a phone call to any refugee center in italy, they will tell you where these people really come from, once their real nationality is established.

http://www.lenius.it/migranti-2017/

This is in italian but talks about the arrives in 2017, giving the official percentages: their nationalities are guinea, nigeria, bangladesh, gambia, ivory coast, senegal, morocco. In this order. None of this countries is at war.

Uhm Blackie, I don't know how to tell you this man, but your article directly uses my source as its source, the UNHCR. My data was based on the 2016 numbers, while he is using the 2017 numbers so far. I prefer the full year overview. I also look at all Med crossings. Here is the data for Italy for 2016 https://data2.unhcr.org/en/documents/download/53633 Now the important part is figure 8, which I unfortunately cannot link. But here it shows that 60% gets rejected while the remaining 40% gets some form of status to remain. So while Italy has a lot of Africans arriving, only 60% gets classified as migrants, not 80%. Why 40% gets a protected status I don't know as you would need to go into a ton more detail that these short overviews don't provide. But nevertheless its still not 80% even if looking at Italy alone.

 Disciple of Fate wrote:

Uhm Blackie, I don't know how to tell you this man, but your article directly uses my source as its source, the UNHCR. My data was based on the 2016 numbers, while he is using the 2017 numbers so far. I prefer the full year overview. I also look at all Med crossings. Here is the data for Italy for 2016 https://data2.unhcr.org/en/documents/download/53633 Now the important part is figure 8, which I unfortunately cannot link. But here it shows that 60% gets rejected while the remaining 40% gets some form of status to remain. So while Italy has a lot of Africans arriving, only 60% gets classified as migrants, not 80%. Why 40% gets a protected status I don't know as you would need to go into a ton more detail that these short overviews don't provide. But nevertheless its still not 80% even if looking at Italy alone.

60% in 2016 is still very high, also considering that is extremely difficult (and expensive) to send them back because we can't use the force. Looking at the nationalities of those who arrived in the last months it's easy to imagine a percentage of 80% if not more, none of their countries is at war. In that 40% there were also included nationalities like albania, which citizens can get the refugee status because of outdated parameters. There are also included some time-limited status, like the one that anis amri got. Not to mention the fake underage boyz which are granted permission to stay, despite they are much older, like the eritrean fake teenage boy that murdered a girl in swedish refugee centre.

That's why the 80% that I claimed is higher than the real numbers, but it's closer to the percentage of the real refugees as many people that actually manage to get that status are not fleeding from wars of persecutions. The percentage I gave was referred to a specific city (it's 83% to be correct) and it was only an estimate of how many illegals are real refugees, not how many manage to get the status.

In italy there's an ongoing trial (the eventual sentences are expected by july) called Mafia Capitale in which several people are accused of human trafficking, providing fake documents to grant the status to the illegals, and also taking a lot of money that came from EU destined for the refugees. We are talking about a business of billions in euro value.

The real refugees are only a tiny percentage of those who come illegally. With the current laws and procedures many illegals manage to get the status even if they shouldn't be entitled to get it, that's why that 60% (which is still high) should be higher and according to the nationalities of those who arrived recently is going to rise.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Disciple of Fate wrote:


Seriously, asking me for more sources? That study is perfectly valid as Arabs and Africans are also foreigners. You want studies directly researching a phenomena about marriage from people who have been here barely a few years? Look here is another study about Moroccan and Turkish Dutch population getting married through a study of the population of Amsterdam, where 10% marries an ethnic Dutch person, which correlates to the 10% mixed marriage from the other study, but in fact gets excluded in that one because we all technically have the same Dutch nationality: http://www.fsw.vu.nl/en/Images/huwelijkenamsterdam_Spdf_tcm250-60417.pdf Sure its difficult to show, but this shows that Muslims and non-Muslims marry. Can you prove to me the marriage levels of Muslims and on-Muslims together are lower than Christians and non-Christians however? Lets not pretend that something as influential in someones life as religion won't strongly affect choice of partner. Here is some interfaith marriage news from the UK: http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2012/12/2012122795639455824.html This is the point where you give me some sources to look over backing up your claims.

I said that there are muslims (but foreingers with very different cultures in general) that are perfectly integrated into western societies. Of course there are some mixed couple, I also know some of them. The significant info is the percentage, which in my opinion should be quite higher. The Uk article you linked clearly shows that the majoirty of muslims doesn't want to mix. "According to the UK constabulary, 2,823 honour crimes were reported to the police in 2010 and an estimated 10,000 forced marriages take place in Britain every year ". These things are unacceptable and they're a consequence of letting radicalisms grow.

We can only have opinions about what reasons bring people to leave their country and join a bloody cause in a foreign region. I think some nations decided to put their head under the sand and failed to stop radicalisms and hate speechs because they fear to cause backlash and to get a racist tag. In italy if you get caught with ISIS images on the phone or some like to pages linked to jihadist it's enough to be imprisoned and/or deported. No way people that are linked with terrorism are letting free, even if they have marginal roles. I've seen reports that showed salafi speechs in public squares in germany with regular permissions, I hope they're not allowed now, but how was that possible? Why people that live in rich countries that are considered tolerant, open and modern are eager to follow a radical community and even leaving their country to fight with ISIS, more than other countries that offer less possibilities and an average quality of life that is lower than theese countries? My opinion is these countries failed to fight radicalisms because of some sense of guilt they have towards africans and eastern asians, and so a lot of people that are poisoned by the idea of living under an islamic state at a certain moment of their life they realize that living in a western country is a sin.

In order to fight radicalisms and then terrorism european societies and their citizens need to change, to evolve by refusing a massive immigration of people that can't contribute to our countries, by accelerating the peace process in lybia, syria and iraq, by not being afraid to punish behaviours of the minorities that are incompatible to democracies and by making efforts to consider people with different cultures just like people and not aliens or puppies that need to be saved but we don't want anything to do with them.

Stop. Making. Claims. Without. Sources.

You didn't even acknowledge that you were spouting rubbish with your 80% figure, you just took it in stride and kept going with a bunch of claims that we have no reason to believe beyond your word for it and, as we have demonstrated, your word alone is not worth a lot on this subject.

What claims? That 80% was actually 60% and if you exclude those ones who shouldn't get the status as their countries are not at war like the albanians, and those ones who manage to get the status because they are fake underage boys (like Alexandra Mezher's murderer) or because italian criminals gave them, that percentage is going to rise significantly.

Do you need a source that claims that albania is not at war anymore? Or that there are some fake underage refugees? Or that there is an ongoing trial about human traffickers which is almost every week in the newspapers?

 Blackie wrote:
Or that there are some fake underage refugees?

When you single out specific cases, yes, yes I do. That's how reasonable debate works.

 Blackie wrote:
What claims? That 80% was actually 60% and if you exclude those ones who shouldn't get the status as their countries are not at war like the albanians, and those ones who manage to get the status because they are fake underage boys (like Alexandra Mezher's murderer) or because italian criminals gave them, that percentage is going to rise significantly.

Are they, though? We wouldn't know, because you haven't provided sources to back those claims up. That's my entire point: we only have your word for it. I have no doubt that these factors affect the statistics, but you really can't tell to what degree with just conjecture.

 Blackie wrote:
I said that there are muslims (but foreingers with very different cultures in general) that are perfectly integrated into western societies. Of course there are some mixed couple, I also know some of them. The significant info is the percentage, which in my opinion should be quite higher. The Uk article you linked clearly shows that the majoirty of muslims doesn't want to mix. "According to the UK constabulary, 2,823 honour crimes were reported to the police in 2010 and an estimated 10,000 forced marriages take place in Britain every year ". These things are unacceptable and they're a consequence of letting radicalisms grow.

Here you're implying that Islam is the causal factor behind the honor crimes and forced marriages without having any sort of data on who did what.

 Blackie wrote:
Tunisia is a sort of democracy but the majority of the foreign fighters comes from there, because for many muslims a democracy is not tolerable as they wish an islamic state.

Here you're making a quantifiable claim without providing a source.

I could go on and on and on. You keep making factual statements and just expecting us to take your word for it. That doesn't work.

 Blackie wrote:

 Disciple of Fate wrote:

Uhm Blackie, I don't know how to tell you this man, but your article directly uses my source as its source, the UNHCR. My data was based on the 2016 numbers, while he is using the 2017 numbers so far. I prefer the full year overview. I also look at all Med crossings. Here is the data for Italy for 2016 https://data2.unhcr.org/en/documents/download/53633 Now the important part is figure 8, which I unfortunately cannot link. But here it shows that 60% gets rejected while the remaining 40% gets some form of status to remain. So while Italy has a lot of Africans arriving, only 60% gets classified as migrants, not 80%. Why 40% gets a protected status I don't know as you would need to go into a ton more detail that these short overviews don't provide. But nevertheless its still not 80% even if looking at Italy alone.

60% in 2016 is still very high, also considering that is extremely difficult (and expensive) to send them back because we can't use the force. Looking at the nationalities of those who arrived in the last months it's easy to imagine a percentage of 80% if not more, none of their countries is at war. In that 40% there were also included nationalities like albania, which citizens can get the refugee status because of outdated parameters. There are also included some time-limited status, like the one that anis amri got. Not to mention the fake underage boyz which are granted permission to stay, despite they are much older, like the eritrean fake teenage boy that murdered a girl in swedish refugee centre.

That's why the 80% that I claimed is higher than the real numbers, but it's closer to the percentage of the real refugees as many people that actually manage to get that status are not fleeding from wars of persecutions. The percentage I gave was referred to a specific city (it's 83% to be correct) and it was only an estimate of how many illegals are real refugees, not how many manage to get the status.

In italy there's an ongoing trial (the eventual sentences are expected by july) called Mafia Capitale in which several people are accused of human trafficking, providing fake documents to grant the status to the illegals, and also taking a lot of money that came from EU destined for the refugees. We are talking about a business of billions in euro value.

The real refugees are only a tiny percentage of those who come illegally. With the current laws and procedures many illegals manage to get the status even if they shouldn't be entitled to get it, that's why that 60% (which is still high) should be higher and according to the nationalities of those who arrived recently is going to rise.

You can only claim its 60% if looking at Italy alone however. Overall the majority of people coming into Europe are still refugees. Also deportation is using force, you're forcefully deporting someone from a country they want to be in. Sometimes it takes a while to deport people but it still happens if the government thinks its worth it. Again if you looked at the overall numbers in 2017, refugees make up over 50% coming to the EU. The problem with people claiming they are younger than they are is that its almost impossible to prove their real age, I know 30 years olds that are so small and youthful in the face they could and still very often get adressed like they are 14.

You keep going back to this flawed number of 80% as what you consider 'true' refugees doesn't matter. There are experienced organizations deciding on this and they have proven you wrong. I gave you statistics on how many are granted refugee status in a year, the people from you source will only have their papers later this year or next year. Unless it suddenly has some weird spike the 80% is still unreachable.

I don't argue with you that smugglers are the problem. But saying that refugees are a tiny percentage of those coming in illegal is just a plain lie. All these Syrians came illegally even though they would get refugee status. If you don't understand how these terms work, look them up, don't argue from a position of ignorance.

Also here is a nice reason why we shouldn't keep those people held in Libya: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-39109585 At least they won't get raped in European detention centres..

 Blackie wrote:
quote=Disciple of Fate 722751 9305057 a0d53847fffc01e830b8b63ecc690b58.jpg]
Seriously, asking me for more sources? That study is perfectly valid as Arabs and Africans are also foreigners. You want studies directly researching a phenomena about marriage from people who have been here barely a few years? Look here is another study about Moroccan and Turkish Dutch population getting married through a study of the population of Amsterdam, where 10% marries an ethnic Dutch person, which correlates to the 10% mixed marriage from the other study, but in fact gets excluded in that one because we all technically have the same Dutch nationality: http://www.fsw.vu.nl/en/Images/huwelijkenamsterdam_Spdf_tcm250-60417.pdf Sure its difficult to show, but this shows that Muslims and non-Muslims marry. Can you prove to me the marriage levels of Muslims and on-Muslims together are lower than Christians and non-Christians however? Lets not pretend that something as influential in someones life as religion won't strongly affect choice of partner. Here is some interfaith marriage news from the UK: http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2012/12/2012122795639455824.html This is the point where you give me some sources to look over backing up your claims.

I said that there are muslims (but foreingers with very different cultures in general) that are perfectly integrated into western societies. Of course there are some mixed couple, I also know some of them. The significant info is the percentage, which in my opinion should be quite higher. The Uk article you linked clearly shows that the majoirty of muslims doesn't want to mix. "According to the UK constabulary, 2,823 honour crimes were reported to the police in 2010 and an estimated 10,000 forced marriages take place in Britain every year ". These things are unacceptable and they're a consequence of letting radicalisms grow.

We can only have opinions about what reasons bring people to leave their country and join a bloody cause in a foreign region. I think some nations decided to put their head under the sand and failed to stop radicalisms and hate speechs because they fear to cause backlash and to get a racist tag. In italy if you get caught with ISIS images on the phone or some like to pages linked to jihadist it's enough to be imprisoned and/or deported. No way people that are linked with terrorism are letting free, even if they have marginal roles. I've seen reports that showed salafi speechs in public squares in germany with regular permissions, I hope they're not allowed now, but how was that possible? Why people that live in rich countries that are considered tolerant, open and modern are eager to follow a radical community and even leaving their country to fight with ISIS, more than other countries that offer less possibilities and an average quality of life that is lower than theese countries? My opinion is these countries failed to fight radicalisms because of some sense of guilt they have towards africans and eastern asians, and so a lot of people that are poisoned by the idea of living under an islamic state at a certain moment of their life they realize that living in a western country is a sin.

In order to fight radicalisms and then terrorism european societies and their citizens need to change, to evolve by refusing a massive immigration of people that can't contribute to our countries, by accelerating the peace process in lybia, syria and iraq, by not being afraid to punish behaviours of the minorities that are incompatible to democracies and by making efforts to consider people with different cultures just like people and not aliens or puppies that need to be saved but we don't want anything to do with them.