Immigration and multiculturalism news

gral

Well-known member
Screw Denmark!



He's an example of a Muslim immigrant whom I would want in the West.
They are in their rights to refuse asylum, by whatever standard of international law you use; granting asylum is a discretionary act. Deporting him back to his country of origin(which I don't know if they have done, not having read the articles) would be a whole different thing.
 

WolfBear

Well-known member
They are in their rights to refuse asylum, by whatever standard of international law you use; granting asylum is a discretionary act. Deporting him back to his country of origin(which I don't know if they have done, not having read the articles) would be a whole different thing.

Yeah, I mean, it would be nice for him to get asylum somewhere where he can continue to do his creative artistic work, even if not necessarily in Denmark.
 

Urabrask Revealed

Let them go.
Founder
Screw Denmark!



He's an example of a Muslim immigrant whom I would want in the West.
lol, bye! And you, you are not a dane, so shut your leftoid mouth.
 

WolfBear

Well-known member
Screw you, if they don't want diversity, then it is in their right to kick the diversity out, there are plenty European countries with retarded immigration policies for this guy to seek asylum in.

TBF, you know, I make a distinction between good and bad diversity. But Yeah, let him seek and get asylum in a more welcoming European country, which BTW should seriously consider being less welcoming towards the bad kind of diversity, specifically the kind of diversity that results in a rape epidemic in countries like Sweden right now.
 

Marduk

Well-known member
Moderator
Staff Member
And what, exactly, is so horrible about this guy? Did I miss something in the article?
He's a walking international scandal against a country that has rather good relations with the EU. This article contains a particularly significant juicy bit.
Morocco is one of the countries that Denmark has pointed out as a possible location for a reception center for asylum seekers outside its borders and the Danish Foreign Minister traveled to Rabat last summer to discuss immigration policy.
That said, the case is still being processed, and there are loads of immigrants far more deserving of deportation.

It's also a nice case for something i though about should be added to the Refugee Convention, basically a common sense clause - refugees should try to seek asylum in preferably nearby countries that do have an interest (population, government, preferably both) in whatever cause, conflict or other situation that is driving them to leave, and said interest is on the same side as the refugees.
Why? It just reduces unnecessary conflicts, drama and tensions, sometimes to a massive degree. See: V4 and Baltic States, normally not fans of refugees, being unusually generous to refugees from Ukraine. Why? Because they care about the related situation for many reasons, they are in the same cultural circle, and they, both governments and huge popular majorities, are very much on the same side of as the people leaving.

For comparison, does Denmark have an interest in trying to destabilize Morocco's monarchy by soft means? The population probably doesn't care, the government, as you can see, is rather against that.

Try applying that common sense test to any refugee controversy, good luck finding a case where it doesn't predict the sentiment for or against the refugees.
 
Last edited:

WolfBear

Well-known member
He's a walking international scandal against a country that has rather good relations with the EU. This article contains a particularly significant juicy bit.

That said, the case is still being processed, and there are loads of immigrants far more deserving of deportation.

It's also a nice case for something i though about should be added to the Refugee Convention, basically a common sense clause - refugees should try to seek asylum in preferably nearby countries that do have an interest (population, government, preferably both) in whatever cause, conflict or other situation that is driving them to leave, and said interest is on the same side as the refugees.
Why? It just reduces unnecessary conflicts, drama and tensions, sometimes to a massive degree. See: V4 and Baltic States, normally not fans of refugees, being unusually generous to refugees from Ukraine. Why? Because they care about the related situation for many reasons, they are in the same cultural circle, and they, both governments and huge popular majorities, are very much on the same side of as the people leaving.

For comparison, does Denmark have an interest in trying to destabilize Morocco's monarchy by soft means? The population probably doesn't care, the government, as you can see, is rather against that.

Try applying that common sense test to any refugee controversy, good luck finding a case where it doesn't predict the sentiment for or against the refugees.

FWIW, I agree that it's best that refugees be resettled in culturally compatible countries. Much less risk of tensions that way. That said, though, where exactly would be a good place for this Moroccan artist and cartoonist to do his work in peace? Algeria? That country has bad relations with Morocco, right, so it should be safe for him to engage in his activism there, no?
 

Marduk

Well-known member
Moderator
Staff Member
FWIW, I agree that it's best that refugees be resettled in culturally compatible countries. Much less risk of tensions that way. That said, though, where exactly would be a good place for this Moroccan artist and cartoonist to do his work in peace? Algeria? That country has bad relations with Morocco, right, so it should be safe for him to engage in his activism there, no?
800px-Western_Sahara_Positions.svg.png

Green countries on this map naturally don't care about pissing off Morocco.
 

Urabrask Revealed

Let them go.
Founder
Based and "Keep these bastards in line!" pilled. People like these only understand violence and the threat thereof. If we did as the indians do, we would be much better off; the leftoids would have something to cry about, and the foreigners will either stay quiet or move out.
 

Cherico

Well-known member
Based and "Keep these bastards in line!" pilled. People like these only understand violence and the threat thereof. If we did as the indians do, we would be much better off; the leftoids would have something to cry about, and the foreigners will either stay quiet or move out.

one has to remember that Islam came to india with a massive invasion and then they ruthlessly brutalized and exploited the hindu majoirty for centuries (With some exceptions like Akbar the great) After hundreds of years of this the Hindu community has firmly had enough of their shit.

This also happens in china and east asia, it takes an awful lot for hindu's and buddists to get utterly fed up with your shit.
 

WolfBear

Well-known member
Based and "Keep these bastards in line!" pilled. People like these only understand violence and the threat thereof. If we did as the indians do, we would be much better off; the leftoids would have something to cry about, and the foreigners will either stay quiet or move out.

Yeah, I suspect that the more Muslim radicalism there will be in the West, the more that Westerners are going to be behaving like Hindu or Israeli Jewish nationalists. This would, of course, be more of an issue for Western Europe, where the Muslim population is much more working-class than it is here in the US. Though even the US has its fair share of Islamophobia due to 9/11, et cetera.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top