Why are 'refugees' just called 'migrants' now?

This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.

Why are 'refugees' just called 'migrants' now?

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Page 6 of 11 < 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 >

Kermit8 Hevon 25 Aug 15 8.55pm
Quote Stirlingsays at 25 Aug 2015 8.45pm Quote Kermit8 at 25 Aug 2015 8.41pm I think perhaps you have a romanticised view hence my post. So....Are you saying the default culture of the Kurds isn't pro western? That's what I said....It isn't romanticised....It's basically true. I think you are just being contrary with no evidence to back up your ramblings. No i agree with that but the bit about having "the right attitude toward the modern world" is a bit peculiar when plenty are still living in the middle ages via honour killings and such like and others indulge in or support 'terrorism' via the PKK. Big chest and massive boobs [Link]
Alert a moderator to this post

Kermit8

Hevon 25 Aug 15 8.55pm

Quote Stirlingsays at 25 Aug 2015 8.45pm

Quote Kermit8 at 25 Aug 2015 8.41pm

I think perhaps you have a romanticised view hence my post.

So....Are you saying the default culture of the Kurds isn't pro western?

That's what I said....It isn't romanticised....It's basically true.

I think you are just being contrary with no evidence to back up your ramblings.

No i agree with that but the bit about having "the right attitude toward the modern world" is a bit peculiar when plenty are still living in the middle ages via honour killings and such like and others indulge in or support 'terrorism' via the PKK.

Big chest and massive boobs

[Link]

Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721 Reading 25 Aug 15 10.26pm
Quote Kermit8 at 25 Aug 2015 8.55pm Quote Stirlingsays at 25 Aug 2015 8.45pm Quote Kermit8 at 25 Aug 2015 8.41pm I think perhaps you have a romanticised view hence my post. So....Are you saying the default culture of the Kurds isn't pro western? That's what I said....It isn't romanticised....It's basically true. I think you are just being contrary with no evidence to back up your ramblings. No i agree with that but the bit about having "the right attitude toward the modern world" is a bit peculiar when plenty are still living in the middle ages via honour killings and such like and others indulge in or support 'terrorism' via the PKK. The PKK is an odd situation, which given the context of the treatment of Kurds in Turkey isn't a clear cut thing. There is some legitimacy to a people taking up arms when faced with suppression and oppression "One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" [Link]
Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721

Reading 25 Aug 15 10.26pm

Quote Kermit8 at 25 Aug 2015 8.55pm

Quote Stirlingsays at 25 Aug 2015 8.45pm

Quote Kermit8 at 25 Aug 2015 8.41pm

I think perhaps you have a romanticised view hence my post.

So....Are you saying the default culture of the Kurds isn't pro western?

That's what I said....It isn't romanticised....It's basically true.

I think you are just being contrary with no evidence to back up your ramblings.

The PKK is an odd situation, which given the context of the treatment of Kurds in Turkey isn't a clear cut thing. There is some legitimacy to a people taking up arms when faced with suppression and oppression

"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays 26 Aug 15 12.40am
Quote Kermit8 at 25 Aug 2015 8.55pm Quote Stirlingsays at 25 Aug 2015 8.45pm Quote Kermit8 at 25 Aug 2015 8.41pm I think perhaps you have a romanticised view hence my post. So....Are you saying the default culture of the Kurds isn't pro western? That's what I said....It isn't romanticised....It's basically true. I think you are just being contrary with no evidence to back up your ramblings. No i agree with that but the bit about having "the right attitude toward the modern world" is a bit peculiar when plenty are still living in the middle ages via honour killings and such like and others indulge in or support 'terrorism' via the PKK. What you are saying only makes sense if Kurdish culture supported the idea of honour killings or radical Islam. It simply doesn't. Obviously any group that contains humans will comprise of nutters and criminals but I was always talking in generalisms here. 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)
Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays

26 Aug 15 12.40am

Quote Kermit8 at 25 Aug 2015 8.55pm

Quote Stirlingsays at 25 Aug 2015 8.45pm

Quote Kermit8 at 25 Aug 2015 8.41pm

I think perhaps you have a romanticised view hence my post.

So....Are you saying the default culture of the Kurds isn't pro western?

That's what I said....It isn't romanticised....It's basically true.

I think you are just being contrary with no evidence to back up your ramblings.

What you are saying only makes sense if Kurdish culture supported the idea of honour killings or radical Islam.

It simply doesn't.

Obviously any group that contains humans will comprise of nutters and criminals but I was always talking in generalisms here.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721 Reading 26 Aug 15 9.58am
Quote Stirlingsays at 26 Aug 2015 12.40am Quote Kermit8 at 25 Aug 2015 8.55pm Quote Stirlingsays at 25 Aug 2015 8.45pm Quote Kermit8 at 25 Aug 2015 8.41pm I think perhaps you have a romanticised view hence my post. So....Are you saying the default culture of the Kurds isn't pro western? That's what I said....It isn't romanticised....It's basically true. I think you are just being contrary with no evidence to back up your ramblings. No i agree with that but the bit about having "the right attitude toward the modern world" is a bit peculiar when plenty are still living in the middle ages via honour killings and such like and others indulge in or support 'terrorism' via the PKK. What you are saying only makes sense if Kurdish culture supported the idea of honour killings or radical Islam. It simply doesn't. Obviously any group that contains humans will comprise of nutters and criminals but I was always talking in generalisms here. Kurdish Radicalism has traditionally been driven more by Nationalism to self rule and self defense, and socialist ideology, than by the more conservative Islamist movements (arguably they were more influenced by the likes of the PLO and PFLP). "One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" [Link]
Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721

Reading 26 Aug 15 9.58am

Quote Stirlingsays at 26 Aug 2015 12.40am

Quote Kermit8 at 25 Aug 2015 8.55pm

Quote Stirlingsays at 25 Aug 2015 8.45pm

Quote Kermit8 at 25 Aug 2015 8.41pm

I think perhaps you have a romanticised view hence my post.

So....Are you saying the default culture of the Kurds isn't pro western?

That's what I said....It isn't romanticised....It's basically true.

I think you are just being contrary with no evidence to back up your ramblings.

What you are saying only makes sense if Kurdish culture supported the idea of honour killings or radical Islam.

It simply doesn't.

Obviously any group that contains humans will comprise of nutters and criminals but I was always talking in generalisms here.

Kurdish Radicalism has traditionally been driven more by Nationalism to self rule and self defense, and socialist ideology, than by the more conservative Islamist movements (arguably they were more influenced by the likes of the PLO and PFLP).

"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert a moderator to this post

SwalecliffeEagle Swalecliffe 01 Sep 15 2.57am
Quote Catfish at 25 Aug 2015 2.50am Quote SwalecliffeEagle at 24 Aug 2015 9.54pm Quote Kermit8 at 24 Aug 2015 6.19pm Quote Ray in Houston at 24 Aug 2015 6.14pm Quote Kermit8 at 24 Aug 2015 5.38pm But Jewish refugees from Nazi Germany in the 1930's went all over and didn't just end up next door in Poland or France and they weren't called migrants. I'm not sure that taking refuge in Poland or France would have been a good strategy for them. Quite a few though thought it would be. That didn't work out well for them at all. I'm currently studying the treatment of enemy aliens during WW2 (internment and all that jazz) for my dissertation. The story of refugees who escaped to France is just terrible. Having made such a dangerous journey, and having once had hope, they often ended back where they came from, or worse. But in the years leading up to WW2 there were decent vetting processes conducted by the various refugee bodies which had sprung up. They testified to the character and integrity of individuals and were responsible for their welfare. We have no such official, semi-official, or voluntary infrastructure to deal with the issues facing us today. Many have recently contrasted out present hard-nosed attitude with our willingness to take in huge numbers during the refugee crisis of the '30s. Such comparisons are invalid. Where we once had systems of security and sound knowledge of the backgrounds of such people, we now have none. And as it was back then, the trojan horse threat is real. All too real. The approach in tne30s was possibly unique in that the Home Office effectively devolved the decision making to a consortium of refugee charities. The arrangement was very discreet and allowed a lot of discretion behind the scenes. I am sure you have already discovered them but, just in case, suggest looking up Tony Kushner, Louise London and AJ Sherman. I'm still in the beginnings of my research (May deadline), and I'm not actually familiar with these people, so thanks for the heads up! As you know, it's a very interesting topic which hasn't been remembered as well as it perhaps should have been.
Alert a moderator to this post

SwalecliffeEagle

Swalecliffe 01 Sep 15 2.57am

Send a Private Message to SwalecliffeEagle

Quote Catfish at 25 Aug 2015 2.50am

Quote SwalecliffeEagle at 24 Aug 2015 9.54pm

Quote Kermit8 at 24 Aug 2015 6.19pm

Quote Ray in Houston at 24 Aug 2015 6.14pm

Quote Kermit8 at 24 Aug 2015 5.38pm

But Jewish refugees from Nazi Germany in the 1930's went all over and didn't just end up next door in Poland or France and they weren't called migrants.

I'm not sure that taking refuge in Poland or France would have been a good strategy for them.

Quite a few though thought it would be. That didn't work out well for them at all.

I'm currently studying the treatment of enemy aliens during WW2 (internment and all that jazz) for my dissertation. The story of refugees who escaped to France is just terrible. Having made such a dangerous journey, and having once had hope, they often ended back where they came from, or worse. But in the years leading up to WW2 there were decent vetting processes conducted by the various refugee bodies which had sprung up. They testified to the character and integrity of individuals and were responsible for their welfare. We have no such official, semi-official, or voluntary infrastructure to deal with the issues facing us today.

Many have recently contrasted out present hard-nosed attitude with our willingness to take in huge numbers during the refugee crisis of the '30s. Such comparisons are invalid. Where we once had systems of security and sound knowledge of the backgrounds of such people, we now have none. And as it was back then, the trojan horse threat is real. All too real.

The approach in tne30s was possibly unique in that the Home Office effectively devolved the decision making to a consortium of refugee charities. The arrangement was very discreet and allowed a lot of discretion behind the scenes. I am sure you have already discovered them but, just in case, suggest looking up Tony Kushner, Louise London and AJ Sherman.

I'm still in the beginnings of my research (May deadline), and I'm not actually familiar with these people, so thanks for the heads up! As you know, it's a very interesting topic which hasn't been remembered as well as it perhaps should have been.

Alert a moderator to this post

suicideatselhurst crawley 01 Sep 15 4.35am
Quote Stirlingsays at 25 Aug 2015 8.45pm Quote Kermit8 at 25 Aug 2015 8.41pm I think perhaps you have a romanticised view hence my post. So....Are you saying the default culture of the Kurds isn't pro western? That's what I said....It isn't romanticised....It's basically true. I think you are just being contrary with no evidence to back up your ramblings. Argh now theres a word Theres someone in my head ... But its not me X/Box game Tag bazcpfc1961, clan (HMS)
Alert a moderator to this post

suicideatselhurst

crawley 01 Sep 15 4.35am

Quote Stirlingsays at 25 Aug 2015 8.45pm

Quote Kermit8 at 25 Aug 2015 8.41pm

I think perhaps you have a romanticised view hence my post.

So....Are you saying the default culture of the Kurds isn't pro western?

That's what I said....It isn't romanticised....It's basically true.

I think you are just being contrary with no evidence to back up your ramblings.

Argh now theres a word

Theres someone in my head ... But its not me

X/Box game Tag bazcpfc1961, clan (HMS)

Alert a moderator to this post

suicideatselhurst crawley 01 Sep 15 4.47am
Quote Kermit8 at 24 Aug 2015 5.38pm Quote Jamesrichards8 at 24 Aug 2015 5.33pm Well, these people, as true 'refugees' wouldn't be allowed to pick and choose which country they seek asylum in. They are in France, and other non-violent countries, yet seek asylum elsewhere. Refugees seek refuge in the first peaceful country they enter. I've got to get off this site. The liberal bulls*** is doing my head in. Cue some sarcastic reply applauding my decision to leave. Gee this site has really gotten boring. But Jewish refugees from Nazi Germany in the 1930's went all over and didn't just end up next door in Poland or France and they weren't called migrants. if you are genuinely fleeing a war or murderous persecution wherever you end up surely you are still a refugee and not a migrant. It is the manipulation of language that is interesting and our subservience to it. I think Kerms that the word migrant was not around in those days, and everyone just used refugee, also Jewish refugees held no legal status in Germany after 1933, they were not let out but had to buy their way out, using their money and proberty, a fact which the Nazis exploited, we cant really use that example in a modern day situation Theres someone in my head ... But its not me X/Box game Tag bazcpfc1961, clan (HMS)
Alert a moderator to this post

suicideatselhurst

crawley 01 Sep 15 4.47am

Quote Kermit8 at 24 Aug 2015 5.38pm

Quote Jamesrichards8 at 24 Aug 2015 5.33pm

Well, these people, as true 'refugees' wouldn't be allowed to pick and choose which country they seek asylum in. They are in France, and other non-violent countries, yet seek asylum elsewhere. Refugees seek refuge in the first peaceful country they enter.
I've got to get off this site. The liberal bulls*** is doing my head in.
Cue some sarcastic reply applauding my decision to leave. Gee this site has really gotten boring.

But Jewish refugees from Nazi Germany in the 1930's went all over and didn't just end up next door in Poland or France and they weren't called migrants. if you are genuinely fleeing a war or murderous persecution wherever you end up surely you are still a refugee and not a migrant.

It is the manipulation of language that is interesting and our subservience to it.

I think Kerms that the word migrant was not around in those days, and everyone just used refugee, also Jewish refugees held no legal status in Germany after 1933, they were not let out but had to buy their way out, using their money and proberty, a fact which the Nazis exploited, we cant really use that example in a modern day situation

Theres someone in my head ... But its not me

X/Box game Tag bazcpfc1961, clan (HMS)

Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721 Reading 01 Sep 15 10.23am
Quote suicideatselhurst at 01 Sep 2015 4.47am Quote Kermit8 at 24 Aug 2015 5.38pm Quote Jamesrichards8 at 24 Aug 2015 5.33pm Well, these people, as true 'refugees' wouldn't be allowed to pick and choose which country they seek asylum in. They are in France, and other non-violent countries, yet seek asylum elsewhere. Refugees seek refuge in the first peaceful country they enter. I've got to get off this site. The liberal bulls* is doing my head in. Cue some sarcastic reply applauding my decision to leave. Gee this site has really gotten boring. But Jewish refugees from Nazi Germany in the 1930's went all over and didn't just end up next door in Poland or France and they weren't called migrants. if you are genuinely fleeing a war or murderous persecution wherever you end up surely you are still a refugee and not a migrant. It is the manipulation of language that is interesting and our subservience to it. I think Kerms that the word migrant was not around in those days, and everyone just used refugee, also Jewish refugees held no legal status in Germany after 1933, they were not let out but had to buy their way out, using their money and proberty**, a fact which the Nazis exploited, we cant really use that example in a modern day situation I'm not entirely sure that isn't the case for a lot of people claiming asylum, that they don't have to buy their way out of the country. Usually people who successfully claim asylum use traffickers to get them out of the country, and I wouldn't be surprised to find that those traffickers were operating because they were part of the state or were paying kickbacks to state officals. Asylum replaced refugee in language as a means of distinguishing between the UN response (refugees tend to be displaced temporarily, into camps and border areas, where as Asylum tends towards those who are either in other countries or escape persecution and tyranny. People placed from UN camps and humanitarian groups tend to become asylum cases, rather than refugees. "One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" [Link]
Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721

Reading 01 Sep 15 10.23am

Quote suicideatselhurst at 01 Sep 2015 4.47am

Quote Kermit8 at 24 Aug 2015 5.38pm

Quote Jamesrichards8 at 24 Aug 2015 5.33pm

It is the manipulation of language that is interesting and our subservience to it.

I think Kerms that the word migrant was not around in those days, and everyone just used refugee, also Jewish refugees held no legal status in Germany after 1933, they were not let out but had to buy their way out, using their money and proberty, a fact which the Nazis exploited, we cant really use that example in a modern day situation

I'm not entirely sure that isn't the case for a lot of people claiming asylum, that they don't have to buy their way out of the country. Usually people who successfully claim asylum use traffickers to get them out of the country, and I wouldn't be surprised to find that those traffickers were operating because they were part of the state or were paying kickbacks to state officals.

Asylum replaced refugee in language as a means of distinguishing between the UN response (refugees tend to be displaced temporarily, into camps and border areas, where as Asylum tends towards those who are either in other countries or escape persecution and tyranny. People placed from UN camps and humanitarian groups tend to become asylum cases, rather than refugees.

"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert a moderator to this post

johnfirewall 19 Jan 16 10.35pm
BBC articles now have to be followed by this disclaimer: Quote A note on terminology: The BBC uses the term migrant to refer to all people on the move who have yet to complete the legal process of claiming asylum. This group includes people fleeing war-torn countries such as Syria, who are likely to be granted refugee status, as well as people who are seeking jobs and better lives, who governments are likely to rule are economic migrants. The news source shouldn't have to apologise for the use of a term which may undermine the validity of these peoples movement. Norway has done that by deporting them.
Alert a moderator to this post

johnfirewall

19 Jan 16 10.35pm

BBC articles now have to be followed by this disclaimer:

Quote A note on terminology: The BBC uses the term migrant to refer to all people on the move who have yet to complete the legal process of claiming asylum. This group includes people fleeing war-torn countries such as Syria, who are likely to be granted refugee status, as well as people who are seeking jobs and better lives, who governments are likely to rule are economic migrants.

The news source shouldn't have to apologise for the use of a term which may undermine the validity of these peoples movement. Norway has done that by deporting them.

Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721 Reading 20 Jan 16 12.40pm
Kurd culture isn't pro-western, its pro-Kurdish. Same as UK culture isn't pro-western, its pro-British. "One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" [Link]
Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721

Reading 20 Jan 16 12.40pm

Kurd culture isn't pro-western, its pro-Kurdish. Same as UK culture isn't pro-western, its pro-British.

"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert a moderator to this post

nhp61 Goring-By-Sea born, now in Brackne... 22 Jan 16 12.00am
Quote Stirlingsays at 24 Aug 2015 6.12pm Quote radsyrendot at 24 Aug 2015 5.59pm In post office today 2 lads came in from Kosovo with 2 envelopes of £20 notes doing a money transfer back to there homeland 1 stayed 1 went out postmistress asked questions ie where he lived work his mate couldn't answer her she told him to tell friend to come back in he never other lad told her where he lived and his job as a cleaner £4300 he sent back .....w*ers Yep a foreign worker is a poor economic substitute for a British one. The pro-immigration surveys that your typical pro economic immigrant lefty quotes at you don't of course take account of the significant amount of money that is sent out of this country.** A working class British worker is far less likely to do that. The Post Office is an agent for Moneygram, a money transfer system very similar to Western Union. Until not so long ago I was a relief manager for the Post Office, working in many Post Offices large and small across the south of England. In virtually all of those offices, foreigners came in and transferred cash abroad, mainly to eastern Europe and Africa. The total amount of cash transferred out of the country each week at the vast majority of the Post Offices was a five figure sum. There are 11,500 Post Offices in the UK. Say each office averaged £10,000 of outgoing international money transfers a week (small village offices would take a lot less, but town centre offices would take considerably more), that's £115 million a week, that's £5.98 billion a year leaving the country. That is just by using the Post Office. There will obviously be more sent via non Post Office based Moneygram agents and also via Western Union. I think "significant" doesn't quite describe how much money is leaving the UK! By the way, the number of incoming Moneygram transactions were negligible, we would go weeks without seeing one...
Alert a moderator to this post

nhp61

Goring-By-Sea born, now in Brackne... 22 Jan 16 12.00am

Quote Stirlingsays at 24 Aug 2015 6.12pm

Quote radsyrendot at 24 Aug 2015 5.59pm

In post office today 2 lads came in from Kosovo with 2 envelopes of £20 notes doing a money transfer back to there homeland 1 stayed 1 went out postmistress asked questions ie where he lived work his mate couldn't answer her she told him to tell friend to come back in he never other lad told her where he lived and his job as a cleaner
£4300 he sent back .....w***ers

Yep a foreign worker is a poor economic substitute for a British one.

The pro-immigration surveys that your typical pro economic immigrant lefty quotes at you don't of course take account of the significant amount of money that is sent out of this country.

A working class British worker is far less likely to do that.

The Post Office is an agent for Moneygram, a money transfer system very similar to Western Union.

Until not so long ago I was a relief manager for the Post Office, working in many Post Offices large and small across the south of England.

In virtually all of those offices, foreigners came in and transferred cash abroad, mainly to eastern Europe and Africa. The total amount of cash transferred out of the country each week at the vast majority of the Post Offices was a five figure sum.

There are 11,500 Post Offices in the UK. Say each office averaged £10,000 of outgoing international money transfers a week (small village offices would take a lot less, but town centre offices would take considerably more), that's £115 million a week, that's £5.98 billion a year leaving the country.

That is just by using the Post Office. There will obviously be more sent via non Post Office based Moneygram agents and also via Western Union.

I think "significant" doesn't quite describe how much money is leaving the UK!

By the way, the number of incoming Moneygram transactions were negligible, we would go weeks without seeing one...

Alert a moderator to this post

nickgusset Shizzlehurst 22 Jan 16 12.09am
Quote nhp61 at 22 Jan 2016 12.00am Quote Stirlingsays at 24 Aug 2015 6.12pm Quote radsyrendot at 24 Aug 2015 5.59pm In post office today 2 lads came in from Kosovo with 2 envelopes of £20 notes doing a money transfer back to there homeland 1 stayed 1 went out postmistress asked questions ie where he lived work his mate couldn't answer her she told him to tell friend to come back in he never other lad told her where he lived and his job as a cleaner £4300 he sent back .....w*ers Yep a foreign worker is a poor economic substitute for a British one. The pro-immigration surveys that your typical pro economic immigrant lefty quotes at you don't of course take account of the significant amount of money that is sent out of this country.** A working class British worker is far less likely to do that. The Post Office is an agent for Moneygram, a money transfer system very similar to Western Union. Until not so long ago I was a relief manager for the Post Office, working in many Post Offices large and small across the south of England. In virtually all of those offices, foreigners came in and transferred cash abroad, mainly to eastern Europe and Africa. The total amount of cash transferred out of the country each week at the vast majority of the Post Offices was a five figure sum. There are 11,500 Post Offices in the UK. Say each office averaged £10,000 of outgoing international money transfers a week (small village offices would take a lot less, but town centre offices would take considerably more), that's £115 million a week, that's £5.98 billion a year leaving the country. That is just by using the Post Office. There will obviously be more sent via non Post Office based Moneygram agents and also via Western Union. I think "significant" doesn't quite describe how much money is leaving the UK! By the way, the number of incoming Moneygram transactions were negligible, we would go weeks without seeing one... It's not great, perhaps there should be a cap. Not good that profits from many of our privatised industries and services also go abroad.
Alert a moderator to this post

nickgusset

Shizzlehurst 22 Jan 16 12.09am

Quote nhp61 at 22 Jan 2016 12.00am