In light of the new Zealand shooting and today 's in Utrecht (getting uncomfortably close...although i do have form, caught by 911, 7/7 London bombing and Bataclan Paris attack of 2015), Sweden's Idealist policy annoucement is shocking. Surely one needs to be more circumspect about these entangled highly complex issues. And i m not even talking about Chicom's policies. 20 years of neocon foreign policy and 40 years of (european) failed Idealist (dis)integration policy (google Hirsi Ali, ex Dutch MP) have clearly been creating bigger and bigger problems around the world (except in the US, oh u lucky few), the answer surely IS then to doggedly persist with the same thing? Am I going mad here?
What if Chicom enacts this new policy in Xinjiang: conform, or re-education in my 'boarding schools', or assissted asylum application to Sweden. I am speechless. I feel lucky my government (Switzerland) is so practical, humble and not complacent at all. Sweden's? Omg. What am i missing here? Am I turning into a right wing nutter?
It's a shame you feel this way. Muslims getting shot in a mass killing in a place of worship has what to do with your idea of them accepting asylum applicants? Muslims are being thrown into concentration camps in China; innocent people and you think they should not be given asylum?
Loose language prevents useful debate. I appreciate your concern and i will watch my own conscience with care.
With loose language, you have transformed the issues into one of allowing innocent people to be thrown into concentration camps and denying them asylum. When u do that, u End the debate very effectively. Unfortunately, u also end the thinking process.
"Muslims". there are 1.5 bln (?) of them. They are not a uniform faceless stereotype to be saved, hated, feared by turn. They are no different from any large grouping of humanity.
"Thrown into concentration camps", well, passive acceptance of asylum is hardly a moral response to that, is it? Surely only active military actions and active rescue operations constitute the minimum morally acceptable answer. Concentration Camps! It s not a cheap rhetorical device my friend. It is serious. As is Genocide, Ethnic Cleansing, and Religious Persecution.
"Innocent people", by whose measure and perspective, and which innocent people (there r exactly 7 bln of them if u count them all) deserve to be saved? And from whom? Including from tvemselves?
With cliches and stereotypes, important issues, especially regarding Islam and Chicom, dont get analysed, in the main. Everyone, in the main, already has an answer and a pre-determined view before any debate; everyone else is a nutter of course.
Whilst I agree on lose language limiting debate, at no point did I use it.
Definition of concentration camps by britannica.com: "Concentration camp, internment centre for political prisoners and members of national or minority groups who are confined for reasons of state security, exploitation, or punishment, usually by executive decree or military order".
That is, unfortunately, what is happening.
And Muslims are being thrown into the camps. If someone is to flee China to avoid that, they are, by definition, religious/ethnic fugitives and have an internationally accepted right for asylum.
Google picture Concentration Camps. And Like i said, if that is what you and other governments sincerely believe what s happening, I refer you to my first reply regarding morally adequate response.
Thank you for your continued coverage of China's treatment of Muslims.
In light of the new Zealand shooting and today 's in Utrecht (getting uncomfortably close...although i do have form, caught by 911, 7/7 London bombing and Bataclan Paris attack of 2015), Sweden's Idealist policy annoucement is shocking. Surely one needs to be more circumspect about these entangled highly complex issues. And i m not even talking about Chicom's policies. 20 years of neocon foreign policy and 40 years of (european) failed Idealist (dis)integration policy (google Hirsi Ali, ex Dutch MP) have clearly been creating bigger and bigger problems around the world (except in the US, oh u lucky few), the answer surely IS then to doggedly persist with the same thing? Am I going mad here?
What if Chicom enacts this new policy in Xinjiang: conform, or re-education in my 'boarding schools', or assissted asylum application to Sweden. I am speechless. I feel lucky my government (Switzerland) is so practical, humble and not complacent at all. Sweden's? Omg. What am i missing here? Am I turning into a right wing nutter?
Yes you are turning into a right-wing nutter...
It's a shame you feel this way. Muslims getting shot in a mass killing in a place of worship has what to do with your idea of them accepting asylum applicants? Muslims are being thrown into concentration camps in China; innocent people and you think they should not be given asylum?
Loose language prevents useful debate. I appreciate your concern and i will watch my own conscience with care.
With loose language, you have transformed the issues into one of allowing innocent people to be thrown into concentration camps and denying them asylum. When u do that, u End the debate very effectively. Unfortunately, u also end the thinking process.
"Muslims". there are 1.5 bln (?) of them. They are not a uniform faceless stereotype to be saved, hated, feared by turn. They are no different from any large grouping of humanity.
"Thrown into concentration camps", well, passive acceptance of asylum is hardly a moral response to that, is it? Surely only active military actions and active rescue operations constitute the minimum morally acceptable answer. Concentration Camps! It s not a cheap rhetorical device my friend. It is serious. As is Genocide, Ethnic Cleansing, and Religious Persecution.
"Innocent people", by whose measure and perspective, and which innocent people (there r exactly 7 bln of them if u count them all) deserve to be saved? And from whom? Including from tvemselves?
With cliches and stereotypes, important issues, especially regarding Islam and Chicom, dont get analysed, in the main. Everyone, in the main, already has an answer and a pre-determined view before any debate; everyone else is a nutter of course.
Whilst I agree on lose language limiting debate, at no point did I use it.
Definition of concentration camps by britannica.com: "Concentration camp, internment centre for political prisoners and members of national or minority groups who are confined for reasons of state security, exploitation, or punishment, usually by executive decree or military order".
That is, unfortunately, what is happening.
And Muslims are being thrown into the camps. If someone is to flee China to avoid that, they are, by definition, religious/ethnic fugitives and have an internationally accepted right for asylum.
Google picture Concentration Camps. And Like i said, if that is what you and other governments sincerely believe what s happening, I refer you to my first reply regarding morally adequate response.