More than three quarters of Brits would accept refugees into their neighbourhood or home

First topic message reminder :

More than three quarters of Brits would accept refugees into their neighbourhood or home, research suggests, yet the UK has taken a tiny handful of people compared to other wealthy countries like Canada.

The UK came third after China and Germany in Amnesty International’s ranking of how accepting countries are of refugees, which shows anti-refugee rhetoric and policies are wildly “out of step” with public opinion, the charity says.
Britain has committed to taking 20,000 Syrian refugees by 2020, less than a quarter of the number that it should based on the size of its economy, according to Oxfam which called the figure “shocking”.

The British effort pales in comparison to Canada, which just took in 25,000 people in just four months.
That includes the family of the drowned toddler Alan Kurdi, who were welcomed in joyful scenes in Vancouver in December.



Amnesty’s first Refugees Welcome Index, carried out by consultancy GlobeScan, questioned more than 27,000 people across 27 countries about their acceptance of refugees.

It found Russia, Indonesia and Thailand were the countries least welcoming, while Canada, Australia and Spain ranked highly, just behind the UK:

Amnesty
Each country is ranked out of 100 based on how accepting they are of refugees, where 0 means all respondents would refuse refugees entry, and 100 means all respondents would accept refugees into their neighbourhood or home.
David Cameron blocked plans to take 3,000 unaccompanied child refugees already registered in Europe, but was forced to U-turn after pressure from his own MPs and charities.


In comparison, the Canadian government has a website titled #WelcomeRefugees, letting citizens track incoming flights arriving with refugees on board, so they can help them settle in.

Welcoming refugees with “open hearts” is “the Canadian way” says the site, which advises businesses that they should help by “donating money, items and services, and hiring refugees.”

The Canadian site has a counter showing how many Syrian refugees have arrived there (now over 27,190). It tracks asylum applications in progress and counts how many text messages have been sent to ask refugees if they are interested in coming to Canada, as well as how many Syrians have asked about moving to Canada at a UN centre.
“Resettling refugees is a proud and important part of Canada’s humanitarian tradition,” the Canandian refugee site says. Its resettlement programme was launched after Prime Minister Justin Trudeau took office in November 2015. It planned to take 25,000 people in two months, and managed it in four.

Maryam Monsef, Canada’s Minister of Democratic Institutions said: “Welcoming 25,000 refugees in such a short period of time is a shining example of the welcoming spirit of Canadians.

“Throughout the country, we have seen communities – large and small – embrace newcomers as only Canadians could. This is making a tangible difference in the lives of so many.”

Most Brits in the Amnesty research said they would gladly welcome refugees into their area, while 29% even said they would accept refugees into their own home.

And 70% of those surveyed think the UK government should do more to help people fleeing war and persecution.

Government of Canada
Canadian immigration minister John McCallum gives a teddy bear to a young Syrian girl.
Kate Allen, Director of Amnesty International UK, said the findings showed the UK was “overwhelmingly supportive of refugees” and that the government was “out of step with reality”.

“Local organisations are campaigning for their councils to take in refugee families, grassroots groups are collecting supplies for Calais or organising fundraising comedy or music nights and individuals have been heading as far as Greece to volunteer in refugee camps,” she said.

“The survey reveals that anti-refugee political rhetoric is out of step with reality.”

According to Oxfam, the UK and other wealthy nations have resettled less than 2% of Syrian refugees escaping the ongoing civil war.

In 2015 a UNHCR report showed that the poorest countries were caring for most of the world’s refugees. Turkey has taken in more than any country, and is home to over 1.9 million Syrians fleeing violence and instability, while there are thought to be 1.5 million refugees in Lebanon - making one in four people in the country a refugee.

Israel is the only country sharing a border with Syria that has not taken in any refugees from the country, though it has given humanitarian aid and medical treatment to more than 1,000 people.

Pakistan has hosted the most refugees from any area for 22 of the last 36 years according to UNHCR data, but comes in second place to Turkey today. Most refugees in Pakistan are Afghans, who made up the largest proportion of the world’s refugees until Syrian people overtook them in January 2015.

Globally, four out of five people in the survey sad they would welcome refugees into their country “with open arms”.
Nearly a third (32%) said they would accept refugees in their neighbourhood while half (47%) would accept refugees in their city, town or village.

One in 10 would take refugees into their home, ranging from 46% in China down to 1% in Russia.

In 20 of the 27 countries, more than 75% of respondents said they would let refugees in their country. Just 17% said they would refuse refugees entry to their country.

Russia was the only country in which more than a third of people said they would deny refugees access (61%).

Amnesty is calling on leaders at the World Humanitarian Summit in Istanbul next week to commit to a permanent system for sharing the responsibility for refugees. The charity is asking governments to resettle 1.2 million refugees by the end of 2017 - far more than the 100,000 per year that are being taken annually.

Even that many would be less than a tenth of the 19.5 million refugees in the world today.

Allen from Amnesty International said the UK government could go to the World Humanitarian Summit a “confident that British citizens are ready and willing to welcome refugees, not only into the country, but also into their neighbourhoods and even their homes.”

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/refugees-welcome-index-amnesty-which-countries-have-taken-most_uk_573cc73fe4b0328a838bdb67?utm_hp_ref=uk-politics&ir=UK%2BPolitics§ion=uk_politics




There are literally thousands of people at grassroots level helping, collecting, campaigning, going to Calais and Greece to help and I'm very glad that this research shows they are the MAJORITY in the country.

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:Islam hates anything and everything that is not islam.


Muslims follow islam...


Therefore Muslims hate anything and everything that is not islam.

You have a simpleton's grasp of reality ...

Grasp? More like a cramp.

Tommy do you logically understand what sassy meant -
that Muslim extremists convince naive and easily primed Muslims by showing them "anti Muslim" posts and articles etc that "we" all hate them?

That is partly true IMO, but not the whole story.

I think Tommy, that you think, when sassy says that, that she's somehow defending them.
She's not.

Tommy Monk wrote:Islam hates anything and everything that is not islam.


Muslims follow islam...


Therefore Muslims hate anything and everything that is not islam.

Do you know any Muslims in person?

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:Islam hates anything and everything that is not islam.


Muslims follow islam...


Therefore Muslims hate anything and everything that is not islam.

You have a simpleton's grasp of reality ...

No... I am just making a basic statement of fact and expanding the logical progression... in simpleton terms...



Please tell me what part of this is incorrect...?


And your reason why?

The fact remains, mmmmuzzzzizzzz are not of any measurable benefit to our island.

I could not get a GP appointment cus the surgery has been taken over by Somaliz, ya can't move for them..

eddie wrote:Tommy do you logically understand what sassy meant -
that Muslim extremists convince naive and easily primed Muslims by showing them "anti Muslim" posts and articles etc that "we" all hate them?

That is partly true IMO, but not the whole story.

I think Tommy, that you think, when sassy says that, that she's somehow defending them.
She's not.

Are you seriously trying to say that 'extremist' Muslim terrorists are just 'naive and easily primed'...!?


And are somehow just the 'victims' of OTHER 'extremist' Muslim terrorists...!?


I suppose all those other extremist Muslim terrorists were also just 'naive and easily primed' victims of yet other extremist Muslim terrorists...!?


And... hold on... let me guess... THEY were also just 'naive and easily primed' victims of yet another lot of extremist Muslim terrorists too...!?


And of course... none of it was anything to do with islam...!?


Or the fact that islam hates anything and everything that is not islam...!?


And nothing to do with their guide book instructing them to fight unbelievers etc...!?


Or by it telling them that they are superior and must enforce their islam onto everyone else either by violence or any other means possible...!?



And of course sassy is not defending them when she tries to suggest that it's all our fault for not liking the hostility of the 'religion of peace' and those who follow it's instructions of violence and domination...!!!

eddie wrote:Tommy do you logically understand what sassy meant -
that Muslim extremists convince naive and easily primed Muslims by showing them "anti Muslim" posts and articles etc that "we" all hate them?

That is partly true IMO, but not the whole story.

I think Tommy, that you think, when sassy says that, that she's somehow defending them.
She's not.

Well there is a very simple way to show if at all sassy's view has any merit.

Okay due to racism by the BNP and that online towards Non-Muslims, Africans, Indians, Chinese, Japanese etc, why are we not then looking at countless terrorist acts committed world wide by them?
Then apply this to the Christians in the Middle East, where there is boundless hate daily they suffer with both in society and online?
I mean based on such constant hate, all you have to do is look at the persecution and enslavement of Blacks in the US.
Where is all the terrorism from them.??

You see its piss poor claims made by sassy that fail to look at what the root cause is.
That is Islam, which plays off a view of Transgression, Jihad, Martydom, a very nasty mixture.

So is sassy saying there is something racially inferior or religious inferior with those drawn to Islamic terrorism and extremism?

As when you applly her reasoning to other groups who suffer hate, her reasoning simply is flawed

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:Islam hates anything and everything that is not islam.


Muslims follow islam...


Therefore Muslims hate anything and everything that is not islam.

Do you know any Muslims in person?

Do you need to have met Hitler to understand what Nazism was or what he was like?

Paul Ettinger wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:Islam hates anything and everything that is not islam.


Muslims follow islam...


Therefore Muslims hate anything and everything that is not islam.

Do you know any Muslims in person?

Do you need to have met Hitler to understand what Nazism was or what he was like?

So now your typical Muslim is like Hitler?!

Tommy Monk wrote:Islam hates anything and everything that is not islam.


Muslims follow islam...


Therefore Muslims hate anything and everything that is not islam.

ben wrote:
You have a simpleton's grasp of reality ...

No... I am just making a basic statement of fact and expanding the logical progression... in simpleton terms...



Please tell me what part of this is incorrect...?


And your reason why?

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Paul Ettinger wrote:



Do you need to have met Hitler to understand what Nazism was or what he was like?

So now your typical Muslim is like Hitler?!

The extremist ones are.

Missing the point again, as do you need to know someone in person to understand their religion or idology?

NO, hence the stupidity of of your point, but then you castigate all Republicans and Trumps supporters as the same, and its doubtful you have met many.

I doubt you have met many English people and yet you make many sweeping statements.

The thing is nobody was making any sweeping statements on Muslims, but they were stating facts on Islam

Paul Ettinger wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:

So now your typical Muslim is like Hitler?!

The extremist ones are.

Missing the point again, as do you need to know someone in person to understand their religion or idology?

NO, hence the stupidity of of your point, but then you castigate all Republicans and Trumps supporters as the same, and its doubtful you have met many.

I doubt you have met many English people and yet you make many sweeping statements.

The thing is nobody was making any sweeping statements on Muslims, but they were stating facts on Islam

Oh, I understand...facts can't be "sweeping statements"?  

Original Quill wrote:

Paul Ettinger wrote:



The extremist ones are.

Missing the point again, as do you need to know someone in person to understand their religion or idology?

NO, hence the stupidity of of your point, but then you castigate all Republicans and Trumps supporters as the same, and its doubtful you have met many.

I doubt you have met many English people and yet you make many sweeping statements.

The thing is nobody was making any sweeping statements on Muslims, but they were stating facts on Islam

Oh, I understand...facts can't be "sweeping statements"?  

On Islam no they cannot be sweeping statements when its a doctrine

You know next to nothing on theology anyway as evidently seen.

How many times do you make sweeping statements on Republicans?

But then you are without a doubt one of the worst regressives on here who advocates doing nothing to combat the world problems, which as seen only increases them.

Anything else monkey boy?

Stormee wrote:The fact remains, mmmmuzzzzizzzz are not of any measurable benefit to our island.

I could not get a GP appointment cus the surgery has been taken over by Somaliz, ya can't move for them..

In the area I live it's proven time and time again that newly arrived immigrants are given priority when enrolling on NHS waiting list, and it's been this way for years....waiting times now to see my GP vary between 2 and 3 weeks. It used to be within one or two days.

2 examples.... my OH could not enlist at the local dentist practice, he tried several times, the reason always  given was  they were full and taking no more patients. On one occasion he needed emergency treatment and was sent to a practice miles away for a one off treatment.
On my checkups I saw a full family being enlisted...child, mother and grandparent...they had a translator helping them fill out the application form. My OH phoned again the same day to be told...NO, we are still full. Other immigrants were admitted to the practice yet local people were refused.

My mum who was in her late 80's made several requests to enrol into my GP'S surgery but could not. She was instead sent to a really inconvenient practice, where she had to climb stairs every time she needed to see the nurse.
A  few months after my mum died I was in the waiting room at the GP'S. A foreign man was arguing with the receptionist insisting his wife be enlisted. The receptionist said unless he could provide proof she was resident here she could not.

My mum had been resident here all her life.

Is it racist to point this out and resent this sort of discrimination...I think not.

Syl...try asking for a doctor that speaks understandable english in some practices.....

Lord Foul wrote:Syl...try asking for a doctor that speaks understandable english in some practices.....

Well that should be a requirement...speaking, understand and writing the language of the country you are working in is a matter of safety when you are in the medical profession.

We have (present day) one Scot, one Irish, and 4 Asian Dr's working at our GP'S.

I have to say they all speak good English and the ones I have seen are very helpful...not that I go much.

Keep voting lib lab con and we will just keep having more of the same!