Jump to content

Welcome to FutureTimeline.forum
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!

These ads will disappear if you register on the forum

Photo

Refugee & Migrant Crisis


  • Please log in to reply
173 replies to this topic

#161
caltrek

caltrek

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,197 posts

Myanmar Refugee Exodus Tops 500,000 as More Rohingya Flee

 

https://www.courthou...-rohingya-flee/

 

Introduction:

 

TEKNAF, Bangladesh (AP) — He trekked to Bangladesh as part of an exodus of a half million people from Myanmar, the largest refugee crisis to hit Asia in decades. But after climbing out of a boat on a creek on Friday, Mohamed Rafiq could go no further.

 

He collapsed onto a muddy spit of land cradling his wife in his lap — a limp figure so exhausted and so hungry she could no longer walk or even raise her wrists.

The couple had no food, no money, no idea what to do next. Their two traumatized children huddled close beside them, unsure what to make of the country they had arrived in just hours earlier, in the middle of the night.

 

Rafiq said their third child, an 8-month-old boy, had been left behind. Buddhist mobs in Myanmar burned the child to death, he said, after setting their village ablaze while security forces stood idly by — part of a systematic purge of ethnic Rohingya Muslims from Buddhist-majority Myanmar that the United Nations has condemned as “a textbook example of ethnic cleansing.”

 

Five weeks after the mass exodus began on Aug. 25, the U.N. says the total number of arrivals in Bangladesh has now topped a half a million.


The principles of justice define an appropriate path between dogmatism and intolerance on the one side, and a reductionism which regards religion and morality as mere preferences on the other.   - John Rawls


#162
caltrek

caltrek

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,197 posts

Immigrating While Black

 

https://nonprofitqua...igrating-black/

 

Introduction:

 

Last week, NPQ published a newswire by Carole Levine on the historic and pernicious role of color in the sorting of immigrants and refugees. But structural racism often operates under cover of complexity. This veil, however, can be pierced through looking at systemic data, and that is what advocates for Black immigrants are trying to do even as both the issues of race and immigration are at a boiling point—striking as the iron is hot.

 

The Pew Research Center reports that, in 2016, 32 percent of all refugees that came to the United States were from Africa. Three countries—Democratic Republic of the Congo, Somalia, and Eritrea—are the leading countries of origin. This number is even higher in 2017, with the New York Times reporting that 36 percent of all refugees resettled in the United States came from countries in Africa (primarily from six countries: Congo, Somalia, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Sudan, and the Central African Republic)


The principles of justice define an appropriate path between dogmatism and intolerance on the one side, and a reductionism which regards religion and morality as mere preferences on the other.   - John Rawls


#163
caltrek

caltrek

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,197 posts

Pope appeals for help for migrants

 

http://www.msn.com/e...ID=ansmsnnews11

 

Introduction:

 

Pope Francis on Sunday urged governments and people to do more to help migrants and not see them as enemies, wearing a plastic ID bracelet used by asylum seekers to drive home his message.

 

Francis visited a drab refugee center on the outskirts of Bologna known simply as "The Hub". Run by a charity, it is home to about 1,000 asylum seekers, most of whom risked their lives crossing the Mediterranean from Africa and the Middle East.

 

There, they live in gray containers and other forms of temporary housing while awaiting decisions on their asylum requests to be moved to other towns in Italy.

 

Many of the refugees and migrants are without documents and all wear a plastic yellow bracelet. The pope wore one bearing his name and the number 3900003 on his right wrist. It was given to him by an African refugee.

 

"Many who don't know you are afraid of you," he told them as a light drizzle fell. "That makes them think they have the right to judge (you) coldly and harshly," he said

The principles of justice define an appropriate path between dogmatism and intolerance on the one side, and a reductionism which regards religion and morality as mere preferences on the other.   - John Rawls


#164
Alislaws

Alislaws

    Democratic Socialist Materialist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 716 posts
  • LocationLondon

If only the pope was part of some sort of massive organisation funded almost entirely by donations with extensive experience in charity work, then he'd really be able to make a difference for these refugees. 

 

Although with over 5 million refugees, and only 285 million European Catholics to try and help them. I guess he has done all he can. 



#165
caltrek

caltrek

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,197 posts

Speaking of doing all that one can.

 

Trump lists immigration demands

 

http://www.politico....dreamers-243586

 

Extract:

 

President Donald Trump laid out his immigration principles for Capitol Hill on Sunday — a list of hardline policies that could seriously complicate the prospects of striking a deal with Democrats over the future of hundreds of thousands of young undocumented immigrants.

 

….The administration also wants lawmakers to end the diversity visa lottery — which doles out visas to immigrants from countries traditionally underrepresented in the United States — and to set the ceiling for refugees “at an appropriate level." The White House plans to limit the number of refugees in fiscal 2018 to just 45,000 — the lowest level since at least 1980.

 

This is yet one more indication of the evil that is the Republican party.  The last Republican president, based on blatantly fabricated lies about weapons of mass destruction, launches an invasion of Iraq.  In no small part, that action brought a huge amount of instability to the Middle East, contributing greatly to the refugee crisis.  So, the republicans step up to the plate, assume some responsibility for the mess, and strive to take in these refugees?

 

No, their fearful leader proposes dropping the number of refugees to be admitted to the U.S. to the "lowest level since at least 1980."  Leaving the refugee problem to largely be solved by the rest of the world.  Who supports this nonsense?

 

Voters who put Bush into office in the first place.  Voters who now indulge themselves in the denialist fantasies of this morally bankrupt regime. Who tune out any opinion critical of Trump as being "fake news".  Voters who follow the oil interests to whatever hell may result from increasing short term industry profits.

 

Come on Trumpians.  Can any of you explain this nonsense to me in any other terms?


The principles of justice define an appropriate path between dogmatism and intolerance on the one side, and a reductionism which regards religion and morality as mere preferences on the other.   - John Rawls


#166
rennerpetey

rennerpetey

    To infinity, and beyond

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 175 posts
  • LocationLost in the Delta Quadrant

 

Come on Trumpians.  Can any of you explain this nonsense to me in any other terms.

I would like to announce that I am not a "Trumpian" any more.  I actually made this decision a couple months ago, but I never made a formal announcement.  I'm sorry for my actions from my time as one.


  • caltrek and Alislaws like this

Pope Francis said that atheists are still eligible to go to heaven, to return the favor, atheists said that popes are still eligible to go into a void of nothingness.


#167
caltrek

caltrek

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,197 posts

Just out of curiosity, what were the most important issues or factors that made you change your mind?

 

 

As I recall, you are still a pretty young fellow, so do not feel the need to apologize.  Speaking only for myself, that you are willing to learn from experience and from  studying the issues and current events is gratifying enough. 


The principles of justice define an appropriate path between dogmatism and intolerance on the one side, and a reductionism which regards religion and morality as mere preferences on the other.   - John Rawls


#168
rennerpetey

rennerpetey

    To infinity, and beyond

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 175 posts
  • LocationLost in the Delta Quadrant

Just out of curiosity, what were the most important issues or factors that made you change your mind?

I guess that its because of my time on this forum.  Over my year(kind of) on this forum, I've realized that we need to focus on renewable energy and scientific research more than we do on the military or tax reform.  I've just been disillusioned.  The democrats have the same problem, we need to focus on the future rather than feminism or gun control, but they are a little better.  I think that It is also my change to atheism, and me realizing that the republicans are based on a big farce.  Also I read Homo Deus and that changed my outlook on life.


Pope Francis said that atheists are still eligible to go to heaven, to return the favor, atheists said that popes are still eligible to go into a void of nothingness.


#169
PhoenixRu

PhoenixRu

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,513 posts
  • LocationRussia

Just out of curiosity, what were the most important issues or factors that made you change your mind?

 

Though nobody asked me, but i'll answer too.

 

"Big farce" indeed. Trump could become great hero or great villain, and i'd still respected him in both cases. Instead, he have demonstrated the clear weakness and unprofessionalism. To me, this was totally unexpected...


  • Alislaws likes this

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

 

"And the Russian land, let God keep it! Under heavens, there is no other land like this. And although Russian nobles are not righteous neither kind, let God arrange the Russian land and give us enough justice" - Afanasy Nikitin, medieval traveler of XV century.


#170
Yuli Ban

Yuli Ban

    Nadsat Brat

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,133 posts
  • LocationAnur Margidda

Trump isn't going to be a great hero, I'll tell you that.

 

Bob Corker all but said that there is no 18-D chess being played. If anything, what's going on in the White House is nothing but trying to stop Trump from carrying out incredibly impulsive actions. All Trump is doing now is dividing his own party (by stupidly attacking Republicans, especially the Republicans most necessary to carry out his agenda) and uniting the opposition party. 

 

A true political "hero" (a better word would be leader) would be a bipartisan statesman (within reason). A strongman would defend his own party, his own House you might say, and do everything he can to destroy the opposition.

 

Trump isn't doing either. He's just barely making an effort to be bipartisan in Washington while simultaneously blaming everything that's going wrong on Democrats (but did I mention that he is at least making some modicum of an effort to work with them?), and he's calling his own men fools and ungrateful losers. And it's not even directed attacks to take out the more influential Republicans; it's just a scattershot approach and you'd better hope you don't get hit. 

 

It makes absolutely no sense in the field of politics to do this, but it's a much better tactic inside of a corporate office. He's basically treating Democrats as a rival corporation and Republicans like insubordinate workers and managers in his own business, failing to realize that's not how it works in the American political process. Up the pettiness and stupid statements and you have something approaching Trump's style. 

 

Business and politics are, indeed, very similar. They're very similar in the same way a lion and a wolf are very similar.

 

If he keeps doing this, he's going to cause a horrible schism in the GOP, one far worse than what we saw between Clinton and Sanders. Because I can tell you right now that I have plenty of Republican friends and more than 3/4 of them have had it with Trump and are almost ashamed to think he's representing their party. That's anecdotal, I know, but I know it's not an uncommon sentiment. But you'd be foolish to think he has no support at all. There are plenty of people who think he's the greatest Republican president to ever take office, even with his impulsiveness. Some even feel his only mistakes have been to try reaching out to Democrats and the more liberal wings of the Republican party or "classical conservatives" and that he should follow the likes of Ted Cruz and Roy Moore— or better yet, Pinochet. I'm no longer friends with him, but one guy I knew was once a staunch libertarian conservative. After Trump, he has apparently has an "epiphany" that libertarianism is just "repackaged anarchism" and that we need a highly authoritarian nationalist government, preferably a one-party state. And if anything can be guessed, tons of so-called "libertarians" are lying to themselves, instead supporting authoritarianism but trying to rationalize it as libertarianism.

Just go see /r/Libertarian to see how many have turned against Trump but remain libertarian, then go to /r/Anarcho_Capitalism or /r/ShitStatistsSay to see how many are openly endorsing fascism or ultranationalism but still claiming they're right-wing anarchists. Or better yet, don't.

 

This is what Trump's setting us up for. The Democrats are reeling from the schism between the Sanders supporters  and the Hillary supporters (think of it like the difference between Corbyn and Blair in the UK's Labour Party), but that divide is nowhere near as overwhelmingly impossible to bridge as it was almost a year ago. Compare that to Republicans, usually considered the ones who fall in line, who are starting to step against Trump for every insult he directs towards them. All you need to trigger a new schism is to get a right-wing, conservative, and/or libertarian opponent to Trump who has enough wide and growing support.

 

I know Jakob's pushing Austin Petersen. 


  • Cody930 and rennerpetey like this
Nobody's gonna take my drone, I'm gonna fly miles far too high!
Nobody gonna beat my drone, it's gonna shoot into the sky!

#171
caltrek

caltrek

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,197 posts

^^^Unfortunately, "barely making an effort to be bipartisan in Washington while simultaneously blaming everything that's going wrong on Democrats"  today passes as leadership.  One might add that if you are a Democrat blaming everything of the Republicans is also common.

 

Trump figured out that to be successful in politics, one had to appear to be all (good) things to all people.  Unfortunately, he does this without any real convictions of his own.  Except perhaps to increase his own financial fortune.  Hence his "incredibly impulsive actions".   

 

His background in business reminds of the book called The One Minute Manager or something like that.  The idea being that managers could direct by simply spending a minute or so telling subordinates how they feel about a certain situation and then leaving it to subordinates  as to how to proceed.  Unfortunately, such a style is adopted in an irresponsible way by Trump. That is, everything is geared toward things such as proving personal loyalty to Trump, achieving results without constructive presidential assistance, etc.  

 

So he tweets.  This brings into focus how he is feeling at any given minute.  Emotionally satisfying to some of his followers, it does not seem to be accompanied by any grand strategy  - except perhaps to make sure his ego is stroked.  Tweeting also gives him an opportunity to appeal to the every-man in his audience.   Again, when the substance of you platform is to screw the working man to further aggrandize wealth for yourself, this can also have a limited benefit over time. Waging war on the working class can bring fund raising benefits in that a significant segment of the rich smell the opportunity to benefit from this version of class warfare. The hope is that sooner or later working class folks will wake up to his con.    


The principles of justice define an appropriate path between dogmatism and intolerance on the one side, and a reductionism which regards religion and morality as mere preferences on the other.   - John Rawls


#172
caltrek

caltrek

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,197 posts

https://www.federalr...ng-capabilities


The principles of justice define an appropriate path between dogmatism and intolerance on the one side, and a reductionism which regards religion and morality as mere preferences on the other.   - John Rawls


#173
caltrek

caltrek

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,197 posts

The Banality of Crimes against Migrants

 

http://www.spiegel.d...-a-1175239.html

 

Introduction:

 

(Der Spiegel) Agnes Callamard, UN Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial, Summary, and Arbitrary Executions, presented animportant new report to the UN General Assembly on Friday. The report is on "Unlawful Death of Refugees and Migrants" -- already an unordinary focus for her mandate. In recent years, her office has focused nearly exclusively on counter-terrorism, particularly on deaths by drone attacks.

 

As she explains, the report concerns "an international crime whose very banality in the eyes of so many makes its tragedy particularly grave and disturbing." The contention is rather dramatic, and we believe that it is indeed historic, at least as far as reports by UN bodies are concerned.

 

Callamard spells out the practical implications: "The International Criminal Court should consider preliminary investigation into atrocity crimes against refugees and migrants where there are reasonable grounds that such crimes have taken place and the jurisdictional requirements of the court have been met." It is particularly out of the ordinary for a UN body to recommend to the International Criminal Court what cases it should consider, but that is exactly what Callamard has chosen to do.

 

Against the backdrop of constant militarization of borders, her recommendation is urgent; yet without some contextualization, it can be easily misunderstood. The discipline of international criminal law emerged in aggression and atrocity. The paradigm, still capturing popular imagination, is of course the catastrophe of World War II. Aggressive war was at the center of the jurisdiction of the international military tribunal created by the allied victors. The existence of war was necessary in order to pass judgement on the perpetrators of collective violence.

 

Only gradually has the practice of international criminal law moved away from the fixation on war as the necessary trigger for international accountability. International criminal prosecution diversified its focus. The legal concept of crimes against humanity, linked to war at Nuremberg, is no longer tied to it. For example, the indictment of General Augusto Pinochet in 1998 had associated criminal prosecution with a society's attempt to reckon with past tyranny.

image-1206776-860_poster_16x9-lnkt-12067

Border fence between Hungary and Serbia.


The principles of justice define an appropriate path between dogmatism and intolerance on the one side, and a reductionism which regards religion and morality as mere preferences on the other.   - John Rawls


#174
caltrek

caltrek

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,197 posts

US quits UN global compact on migration

 

https://www.msn.com/...ID=ansmsnnews11

 

Introduction:

 

The United States notified the United Nations that it will no longer take part in the global compact on migration, saying it undermines the nation's sovereignty.

 

The US has been a part of the New York Declaration for Refugees and Migrants since it was formed last year. The declaration aims to ensure the rights of migrants, help them resettle and provide them with access to education and jobs.

 

It calls for the negotiation of a global compact on migration, which is expected to be adopted next year.

 

In explaining its withdrawal Saturday, the US said the pact contains provisions that are inconsistent with the nation's immigration policies.

 

While the US is proud of its leadership on migration and refugee issues, the global approach is not compatible with the nation's sovereignty, according to Nikki Haley, the US ambassador to the UN.


The principles of justice define an appropriate path between dogmatism and intolerance on the one side, and a reductionism which regards religion and morality as mere preferences on the other.   - John Rawls





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users