Refugee crisis

[Katy]

According to the ISIS guidelines for sexual slavery, "The pamphlet, which is presented in question and answer form, lists 21 clarifications on everything from which women are okay to abduct and force into slavery (essentially any "unbelieving" women or girls, which likely translates to any non-Sunni Muslims)"  There are lots of non-Sunni Muslims.  Another article said it was "predominately" Christians and Yazidis, but that doesn't mean only.

 

Does that make you feel better?

 

 

Do you have any media sources that document Muslim women being kidnapped and raped?

 

My understanding is that if these women will convert to Islam they are married off instead of raped multiple times per day.  That was what a Yazidi girl who escaped indicated in an interview, anyway.

[Tanaqui]

My understanding is that if these women will convert to Islam they are married off instead of raped multiple times per day.  That was what a Yazidi girl who escaped indicated in an interview, anyway.

 

Being "married off" does not preclude being raped multiple times per day. It limits the number of rapists, perhaps, but rape can occur within marriage... and I'm using marriage *very* loosely to describe this.

 

[*lifeoftheparty*]

I don't know how people here feel about Ann Voskamp- but I like her post about the crisis, and it has lots of useful links to ways to help:

http://www.aholyexperience.com/2015/09/5-ways-to-stand-up-be-the-church-in-the-worlds-worst-refugee-crisis-since-world-war-ii/

 

 

[Katy]

Being "married off" does not preclude being raped multiple times per day. It limits the number of rapists, perhaps, but rape can occur within marriage... and I'm using marriage *very* loosely to describe this.

 

That is true.  There is a difference between being the victim of one man per day and a dozen though.

[mommaduck]

That is true. There is a difference between being the victim of one man per day and a dozen though.

I think you misunderstand. Being "married off" doesn't preclude rape. They still get raped by other men, plural. Just, maybe, not as many. And being "married off" doesn't mean married and taken care of. It's still more like a sex slave and punching bag in most cases. The end is a lifetime of slavery and/or death.

[Amy in NH]

Actually, the term marriage is used very loosely by the terrorists.  The sex act/rape is the marriage, and then they get "divorced and remarried" when they are passed to the next rapist.  Those guys all deserve to be castrated with no anesthesia.

[Farmgirl70]

I also liked Ann Voskamp's post. If you'd rather not read it, there is a petition to the White House mentioned in the article that I'll just link to here. If you want the US government to welcome more Syrian refugees, please follow the link and sign it: https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/authorize-and-resettle-syrian-refugees-us

[Katy]

I think you misunderstand. Being "married off" doesn't preclude rape. They still get raped by other men, plural. Just, maybe, not as many. And being "married off" doesn't mean married and taken care of. It's still more like a sex slave and punching bag in most cases. The end is a lifetime of slavery and/or death.

 

link?

[Amy in NH]

Do you have any media sources that document Muslim women being kidnapped and raped?

 

My understanding is that if these women will convert to Islam they are married off instead of raped multiple times per day.  That was what a Yazidi girl who escaped indicated in an interview, anyway.

 

Here's one for you, Katie.  Is it better to be burned alive or raped?  Christians are lucky, I guess?!

 

“Only Yazidi women are taken as slaves. Shia women they burn alive. We saw one Shia woman burned alive in front of us. Christian women they leave on the condition that their family must pay a fee to ISIS for being Christians in ISIS territories. And Sunni women are left alone as long as they follow ISIS orders."

[Katy]

Here's one for you, Katie.  Is it better to be burned alive or raped?  Christians are lucky, I guess?!

 

“Only Yazidi women are taken as slaves. Shia women they burn alive. We saw one Shia woman burned alive in front of us. Christian women they leave on the condition that their family must pay a fee to ISIS for being Christians in ISIS territories. And Sunni women are left alone as long as they follow ISIS orders."

 

That simply says Christians who come from families who can afford to pay the subjugation fees aren't raped.  It doesn't say that converts to Islam are married, raped, divorced in a continuous cycle as was claimed up thread.

[Katy]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3199105/ISIS-post-pictures-Christian-women-kidnapped-Syria-threatening-sex-slaves-ransom-not-paid.html

 

Quote:

• Christian, Jewish captives previously enjoyed 'limited protection' from ISIS 
• It now reportedly claims that abusing anyone who is not Muslim is allowed

[Amy in NH]

That simply says Christians who come from families who can afford to pay the subjugation fees aren't raped.  It doesn't say that converts to Islam are married, raped, divorced in a continuous cycle as was claimed up thread.

 

"The informant claims young girls are forced to marry and sleep with older commanders in marriages that last just seven days, before being divorced and partnered with a new spouse."

http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/564552/Islamic-State-British-schoolgirls-Syria-face-marrying-one-husband-week

 

What is it that you want?  I don't understand what your point is.  The starting religion of the victims is the most important thing to you?  The supposed religion of the terrorist?  None of them are actually following Islam.  The forced conversion from one religion to the sham of another is more important to you than the gang rapes?  You don't think they're actually happening?  I read 10 horrific articles trying to figure out what kind of proof you are looking for. 

https://www.thefederalistpapers.org/world/isis-is-kidnapping-young-girls-and-taking-them-to-market-for-this

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/21/world/middleeast/the-islamic-state-is-forcing-women-to-be-sex-slaves.html?_r=0

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/isis-told-yazidi-sex-slaves-6251415

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/reality-life-isis-bride-former-6085180

 

Do you not get that it doesn't matter what religion they are?  They are all suffering tortured victims in a terror zone nightmare. 

Non-Sunni Muslims are victims as much as anyone else, but they aren't being gang-raped enough for you to think they deserve to be rescued?  Please clarify.

[*lifeoftheparty*]

I also liked Ann Voskamp's post. If you'd rather not read it, there is a petition to the White House mentioned in the article that I'll just link to here. If you want the US government to welcome more Syrian refugees, please follow the link and sign it: https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/authorize-and-resettle-syrian-refugees-us

 

There is also a link where you can go to see if there are places near you taking in refugees, so you can help them resettle.

 

http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/orr/state-programs-annual-overview

 

I followed it and found out my county has a World Relief office- and checked out their facebook page- it's a wonderful way that I can help, even while being home raising kids! Recent posts on the facebook page were asking for volunteers to help teach English to recently arrived refugee children, and their parents. You can meet refugees at the airport, and you (or your small group, or church, or whatever) can partner with World Relief to sponsor a refugee family, promising to visit them weekly and just give them support. It's amazing, all the things that we can do for people right at home.

 

Even if you aren't an Ann Voskamp fan, I recommend you read it. There are some useful links in it.

 

 

 

[Tanaqui]

That is true.  There is a difference between being the victim of one man per day and a dozen though.

 

In terms of actual numbers, sure. In terms of emotional and psychological impact? I don't care to speculate.

 

[Melissa in Australia]

Money doesn't count for the transfer in status from asylum seeker to refugee, at least not here, so someone doing that would be rejected for refugee status and deported. I have sympathy for that, but it is not enough to be granted asylum.

 

I'm wondering where people come from into the US who wouldn't be granted asylum assuming a) bureaucracy ever gets around to processing them and b) government employees aren't interpreting the criteria creatively. As I've said, illegals here are people overstaying their visas. The vast majority of people arriving here claiming asylum are found to be people who deserve asylum according to our rules.

 

 

Edit: I don't think I'm making the point you are making Amy. I'm just wondering where actual illegal immigrants into the US come from.

they do in fact get caught and deported. There is a bloke up the road form me who married a Canadian. She overstayed her holiday visa and was caught  a few months later and deported. She was also given a ban form traveling to Australia for 5 years. Her DH then shifted to Canada and overstayed his work  visa. He got sent back to Australia and had a 1 year travel ban before he could go back to Canada.

 

 

I have heard of several others as well.

[Joules]

I heard an interview yesterday with the young boy's uncle (who lives in Canada).  Absolutely heart-breaking (as in bawling in the car in the driveway), but it really helped me understand how hard it is to get help before tragedy strikes.  He talks about what they tried through legal routes to get the family out:

http://www.npr.org/2015/09/04/437597010/for-family-of-drowned-syrian-boy-there-was-no-other-hope-uncle-says

 

[Serenade]

 They don't want to stay here, that much is clear. Local people are offering them stuff (clothes, toys, etc), 

 

 

Why don't they want to stay where you are?

Are they allowed to?  

[MBM]

If you are interested in donating, Charity Navigator analyzes various charities so you that you can see whether administrative costs are acceptable to you. Just type in the name of your charity to get more information.

 

http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=content.view&cpid=1523#.VeruzUvxXJw

 

A college classmate of mine has worked with UNHCR for almost two decades. He's worked mainly in the Bosnia-Herzegovinia area but also parts of Africa and has done everything from setting up camps to reuniting families to providing legal help (he's a lawyer). It's not an easy process. He's lived in Kosovo for about 15 years and I'm trying to find out if he's involved or has any advice to people who want to help.

 

ETA: Here's the Charity Watch site:

 

https://www.charitywatch.org/charitywatch-hot-topic/syrian-humanitarian-relief/4

 

Here's a site to help find state charities/groups that are assisting refugees:

 

http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/orr/state-programs-annual-overview

[Rosie_0801]

they do in fact get caught and deported. There is a bloke up the road form me who married a Canadian. She overstayed her holiday visa and was caught  a few months later and deported. She was also given a ban form traveling to Australia for 5 years. Her DH then shifted to Canada and overstayed his work  visa. He got sent back to Australia and had a 1 year travel ban before he could go back to Canada.

 

 

I have heard of several others as well.

 

Yeah, I know it happens. These days the people in Maribynong detention centre are those overstaying their visas, so I've read. I'm not sure why they need to make the spouse visas so tricky to negotiate.

[TranquilMind]

If the need is equal and the resources are scarce, each organization and person has choices to make. Sometimes it is first come, first serve. Sometimes it is based on dependents, region, support or lack thereof, and yes, group identity like religion. I think all should be helped as people and nations can. But I am explaining why some groups with religious MOs and organizing principles are triaging as they are, if they are. Most go with a first come, first serve basis as their basic guideline, but not all. They're not less Christian for doing so - that's disregarding that scripture indicates very specifically on the topic of helping kin, clansman, and fellow believer before the rest of the Gentiles, and helping those incapable of helping themselves before helping the able bodied.

I want to know why the heck the Arab states aren't helping their brothers in the faith? 

[mom@shiloh]

Thank you, Rosie!  This is what I have been feeling all day. 

 

Hypocrites in the US are weeping over drowning refugees in the Mediterranean and finger-pointing at the European countries who won't take them in, but have been screaming about keeping out refugees on our own border, building giant walls, and jailing children who are trying to escape a similar fate.  And most of them profess to be Christian with a capital C; that's some Christian generosity and mercy!  I saw it all over FB today, and it just burns me. 

 

3% of the population of Iceland has offered to take in Syrian refugees.  3% of the US could take in all of the refugees of Syria plus the ones we are calling "illegal" from Central and South America.  Where are the 9-million Americans willing to take refugees?

 

 Where are the 9-million Americans willing to take refugees?

 

Here.  I'll take them.  I think that I could feed and shelter about a dozen.  Maybe this thread is leading up to this, but  I'd really like to know what we COULD do to help.  Is anyone getting to that on here?

 

ETA:  Oh good.  Someone does get to it on here.  Thanks.

 

[Guest]

I want to know why the heck the Arab states aren't helping their brothers in the faith?

My uncle through marriage works overseas in oil - his family has lived in the UAE, Dubai, Egypt, etc. His wife is an English teacher for adult learners. The perspective they have given is that the religious mess is something that would threaten commerce and wealth in these countries, and that money going in to aid would only end up destabilizing things further by prolonging conflict or ending up in then wrong hands. So they have high gates and big guns and stay clear of it because it's a problem they don't want to deal with.

 

Sad, but predictable. And an attitude held by many. Foreign governments are stuck because the only way to overcome the situation is by forceful occupation, and then you get cast as a bad actor despite potentially saving millions of civilians. Foreign aid money usually ends up in the hands of dictators and the very militias they were supposed to circumvent, and objects are often of precious little use to people trying to travel light. Not to mention the logistics of getting the objects in there...

 

The solution to this is ideological more than military or financial, because as long as extremism flourishes those not adhering to the right kind of extremism are at risk. But ideological change is slow and hard, and the military and financial issues are distasteful.

 

Oil Sheiks want to protect their investments. Refugees aren't an investment they're going to gamble on, from what I've been told :(

[TranquilMind]

My uncle through marriage works overseas in oil - his family has lived in the UAE, Dubai, Egypt, etc. His wife is an English teacher for adult learners. The perspective they have given is that the religious mess is something that would threaten commerce and wealth in these countries, and that money going in to aid would only end up destabilizing things further by prolonging conflict or ending up in then wrong hands. So they have high gates and big guns and stay clear of it because it's a problem they don't want to deal with.

 

Sad, but predictable. And an attitude held by many. Foreign governments are stuck because the only way to overcome the situation is by forceful occupation, and then you get cast as a bad actor despite potentially saving millions of civilians. Foreign aid money usually ends up in the hands of dictators and the very militias they were supposed to circumvent, and objects are often of precious little use to people trying to travel light. Not to mention the logistics of getting the objects in there...

 

The solution to this is ideological more than military or financial, because as long as extremism flourishes those not adhering to the right kind of extremism are at risk. But ideological change is slow and hard, and the military and financial issues are distasteful.

 

Oil Sheiks want to protect their investments. Refugees aren't an investment they're going to gamble on, from what I've been told :(

That's pathetic.

[Amira]

I want to know why the heck the Arab states aren't helping their brothers in the faith?

Lebanon and Jordan, which are both Arab, have taken in a huge number of refugees. Turkey, which isn't Arab but still is Muslim, has taken in 2 million refugees. This has been a huge issue there for years. Half a million refugees are working their way toward Europe. Turkey has gone far beyond what Europe as a whole has been willing to do.

 

The Gulf states could do far, far more, unquestionably. But Muslim countries surrounding Syria have done a great deal without anywhere near as much whining as Europe has done.

[Guest]

That's pathetic.

I know it is. And they don't even have a reasonable claim to stress or fatigue on their systems from immigration, illegal or legal, which is an argument some nations are claiming.

[Bluegoat]

As far as the question of organizations dedicated to helping Christians - it is pretty common for aid organizations to have a specific focus.  Communities are often much less integrated in many places, and there are advantages to working within a community and developing expertise there, and trust.  And different groups may have different kinds of resources available, or different kinds of problems.  It's true that both Muslim and Christian families have been having serious issues, but not necessarily in quite the same way.  The practicalities of dealing with Christians being persecuted for their faith may not be identical to those of Muslims being persecuted for other reasons - even if they are in some ways similar.

 

It is also sometimes the case that organizations are already in place for other reasons among affected communities, or the history of the problem is not the same in different communities.  There have been struggles for Christians in the middle east for quite some time, for example, even before the current crises reached quite the proportions it is at at the moment. 

 

Usually too there are a variety of organizations in place in these kinds of instances, and they may all fill different niches, each being able to respond best to the needs of the people they are helping.

 

I wouldn't assume, unless I knew some specifics, that an organization that served a specific population was in any way implying that other people do not deserve help.  And actually we don't seem to think this most of the time in other areas.  Someone mentioned getting appeals to help Jewish people.  It's common for people to get appeals to help those with whom they share an ethnicity or citizenship or other common background. There are things like cancer charities that appeal especially to people who have been affected by cancer in a loved one.  No one thinks this means those people believe that diabetes isn't an important cause.

 

It is very common, and I think so long as we are careful to be reflective, not a bad thing, to make special efforts to help those we have some kind of connection with.  The assumption is usually that other people will do the same for those they have connections to.  There are worse ways to decide where to direct the actions you can take.   

 

 

[Camelfeet]

 

My uncle through marriage works overseas in oil - his family has lived in the UAE, Dubai, Egypt, etc. His wife is an English teacher for adult learners. The perspective they have given is that the religious mess is something that would threaten commerce and wealth in these countries, and that money going in to aid would only end up destabilizing things further by prolonging conflict or ending up in then wrong hands. So they have high gates and big guns and stay clear of it because it's a problem they don't want to deal with.

Oil Sheiks want to protect their investments. Refugees aren't an investment they're going to gamble on, from what I've been told  :(

 

What you are saying isn't accurate. 

 

The UAE has given hundreds of millions towards the refugee camps:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/10570726/Syria-crisis-how-does-Britains-aid-donation-compare.html 

http://www.philanthropyage.org/2014/11/23/uae-funds-third-healthcare-syrian-refugee-camps/ 

http://www.thenational.ae/uae/uae-aid-for-syrian-refugees-passes-dh134bn

 

This isn't including private donations.  Additionally, they've been bombing ISIS strongholds for months:  http://english.alarabiya.net/en/News/middle-east/2015/02/10/UAE-fighter-planes-bomb-ISIS-targets-and-return-to-their-bases-in-Jordan.html Whether military action is helpful or not is up for debate.  Considering there are only two million emiratis in the UAE, that is a lot of effort.  

 

 

I know it is. And they don't even have a reasonable claim to stress or fatigue on their systems from immigration, illegal or legal, which is an argument some nations are claiming.

 

Most of the Gulf countries have an expatriate work force that out numbers nationals.  The number of foreign residents in most GCC nations is far higher per capita than in most western countries.  Most have no social safety net set up for non-citizens, as non-citizens do not pay income taxes or VAT.  Most gulf countries also prohibit obtaining citizenship via naturalization and don't allow dual citizenship.  It isn't stress or fatigue - allowing immigration would require a complete redesign of how the country operates.  It is a really complex issue.         

 

What the UAE can be criticized for is making it much harder for Syrians to obtain residency and visit visas into the country.  Really, there isn't a good excuse for this since there are stories of people who have legitimate reasons to be here - students, family etc. being denied because of their passports.  I get that they are worried about radicalization from extremists, but if they can come here as students or be sponsored by family, why deny?  Regarding refugees, UAE is in a position where if it starts recognizing the legitimacy of political refugees, then it might have big chunks of its migrant workforce (which makes up 80%+ of the population) start doing the same and attempting to stay here permanently.  Is this a good enough excuse to not take in Syrian refugees?  I don't know, I feel like if the will was there, they could make it happen and at least take in a limited number of refugees on a long term basis without giving them citizenship.  

 

[Ausmumof3]

Our gov says they will take in more Syrians...

 

They aren't increasing the overall intake though just changing where they come from. Seems like a good way to look like you are doing something without doing something.

[Amira]

The Gulf states in general decided decades ago to not allow many Arabs into their countries. Saudi Arabia, for example, used to have a lot of Egyptians working there, but they changed their rules regarding which foreigners are allowed in and now most are from south and southeast Asia. They don't want to import regional problems into Saudi Arabia. This isn't a specific policy against Syrian refugees and I doubt that the policy will change because of the Syrian refugees.

 

Also, Saudi Arabia isn't likely to be high on very many people's list as a place to go to as a refugee. Most Muslims think Saudi Arabia is far too extreme. I think Saudi can have more influence in trying to negotiate an end to the civil war (because it must end for the refugee crisis to end).

[Halftime Hope]

But we're not talking about family; we're talking about people with equal need. Some will be Christian, many will be Muslim. So you would pick and choose the Christians first, because of biblical principle? And not give according to your ability and their need?

 

I find this repugnant, and it certainly only contributes to the reasons I find this whole bible of yours pretty lacking as a guide for morality.

 

As with us all, your personal philosophy, your worldview, colors your interpretation of the facts at hand.  You find Glen Beck (not sure I spelled his name right, but whatever) repugnant for offering aid to Christian families.   From reading upthread, it's a bit unclear who the aid is going to, as there is some ambiguity in what the organization itself has said it is doing.

 

Let's assume that he is indeed offering help only to Christian families.  I can think of several entirely legitimate reasons for that, primarily because it takes resources on the ground to accomplish something, and I know from a podcast and a video or two, months and months ago, that he or people close to him have been involved in a geographical area in which the aggressors are ISIL, and the displaced and beleaguered refugees from that area who need help are not Muslims, they are Christians and Yazidis.  

 

I don't find it offensive at all for someone to be involved with helping people in a certain area, or working with a certain people group or population, and therefore declaring that your efforts will help such and such.

 

I'm really tired of people -- both in the world at large and also on this board -- being so easily offended and always finding reasons to disparage and malign others, not just their work, but their motives.  Several in this thread have disparaged Glen Beck, but honestly, he and his organization are acting.  Good for them.   (Now if we found out that his or any other  organization was keeping half the money for admin costs, then I'd be :glare:. )

 

I am not saying this to defend Glen Beck.  I'm saying this so that we might be better people by seeking first to understand (an old Dale Carnegie quote, but a very wise life principle).  

[Guest]

 

 

What you are saying isn't accurate.

 

The UAE has given hundreds of millions towards the refugee camps:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/10570726/Syria-crisis-how-does-Britains-aid-donation-compare.html

http://www.philanthropyage.org/2014/11/23/uae-funds-third-healthcare-syrian-refugee-camps/

http://www.thenational.ae/uae/uae-aid-for-syrian-refugees-passes-dh134bn

 

This isn't including private donations. Additionally, they've been bombing ISIS strongholds for months: http://english.alarabiya.net/en/News/middle-east/2015/02/10/UAE-fighter-planes-bomb-ISIS-targets-and-return-to-their-bases-in-Jordan.html Whether military action is helpful or not is up for debate. Considering there are only two million emiratis in the UAE, that is a lot of effort.

 

 

 

 

Most of the Gulf countries have an expatriate work force that out numbers nationals. The number of foreign residents in most GCC nations is far higher per capital than in most western countries. Most have no social safety net set up for non-citizens, as non-citizens do not pay income taxes or VAT. Most gulf countries also prohibit obtaining citizenship via naturalization and don't allow dual citizenship. It isn't stress or fatigue - allowing immigration would require a complete redesign of how the country operates. It is a really complex issue.

 

 

What the UAE can be criticized for is making it much harder for Syrians to obtain residency and visit visas into the country. Really, there isn't a good excuse for this since there are stories of people who have legitimate reasons to be here - students, family etc. being denied because of their passports. I get that they are worried about radicalization from extremists, but if they can come here as students or be sponsored by family, why deny? Regarding refugees, UAE is in a position where if it starts recognizing the legitimacy of political refugees, then it might have big chunks of its migrant workforce (which makes up 80%+ of the population) start doing the same and attempting to stay here permanently. Is this a good enough excuse to not take in Syrian refugees? I don't know, I feel like if the will was there, they could make it happen and at least take in a limited number of refugees on a long term basis without giving them citizenship.

You're right, I looked into it and noted the same financial backing - that was one of the places they lived longer term, but may not have been one included on the list of 'not my problem' countries. Some certainly were. I can't speak to this personally as the information wasn't first hand. The attitude toward extremism in these areas he has been exposed to has ranged from sympathetic to "not in my back yard", by and large.

 

Thank you for the correction and additional information :)

[Entropymama]

I think, though, that when it is only the Christians that are mentioned (not saying you, personally, do that), it marginalizes the other affected groups.  Particularly when Christians are a minority of the persecuted, it gives the idea that they are the only ones who matter. 

 

But I also have to ask how Christian it is to only desire to help suffering peoples when they are other Christians?

 

Just another point of view - I think there are many Christians who sort of knew there was bad stuff going on in the Middle East, but it was background noise. Suddenly some Christians are being persecuted and executed. This grabs their attention, it feels more real because they can relate more to middle Eastern Christians. They start paying more attention and feel a desire to help. This doesn't mean they wouldn't help people of other groups, but we're busy and there's a lot going on in the world. Plus, people who pay no attention to the news suddenly had their Facebook feeds blown up by news about this, posted by their Christian friends who do pay attention. Should we pay attention to people of all faiths who are persecuted? Yes, we should. Do we all tend to be more aware of things that seem personal? Yes, we do.

 

One person was quoted by a newspaper as saying: "We can see there isn't enough jobs for you here either, let alone for us." We have a ridiculously high unemployment rate, low wages, and a system in which one gets jobs through personal connections. We're barely out of crisis ourselves. Yes, it would be theoretically possible for at least some of these people to stay here if they wanted to. But they don't. And honestly, who would opt to stay here when they could instead try to get to the EU and possibly obtain an EU passport somewhere down the line?

 

This is something to think about when bringing in refugees to the US, too (not that we're in crisis over here). I think the US should allow all refugees in. I have, however, heard some intelligent arguments about infrastructure, health care, education and housing. It's not an excuse for letting people die, but maybe some of us should turn our energies to solving these infrastructure problems so we can more easily accept refugees. 

[Murphy101]

To me, it seems the effort should go into ending civil war. The refugees already have homes and lives they want to live.

This. I came to this thread to discuss this aspect. Like it or not, figuring out where and how to place an onslaught of 800,000+ refugees IS very difficult to navigate financially and politically, both in the EU and in the States. What steps, if any are being taken to resolve the problems in Syria so that its people can live there safely at some point? If Syria cannot resolve this, do other countries who are dealing with the results have an obligation to step in and take over? Not a popular view either I suspect.

[Lang Syne Boardie]

(Warning: if you already had your Sunday preaching, you may skip this post. Unless your minister said NOTHING about the refugee crisis -- ours did not -- in which case, please read because you are not yet preached up.)

 

I got tired of just reading everybody's opinions, because the questions of "what will this theoretically cost us, to change our minds and start caring," and "can't we fix their home environment because it would be best for them to stay there," remind me a lot of some homeschooling questions, like

 

1. "Can't we stay involved in the schools and eventually make them better?" (No. My kid gets one childhood and he needs it now.)

 

2. "What will it mean for our nation if the 'best people' abandon public education and that community connection? This might lead to disaster for those left behind and for future generations, as people stop investing in public school." (Yes, it's going to suck for awhile, and even if something better emerges, it's going to take generations and will never be the same. Nonetheless, see the answer to #1: My child can't wait.)

 

There is such a thing as an emergent situation. I, for one, am no longer interested in armchair quarterbacking unless the people in the conversation have all forked over some time, money, and energy to deal with the crisis.

 

I did a little digging and found that there is an awful lot of help for refugees in my city. The machinations are in place -- transitional help of all kinds, ongoing support of all kinds. The partnerships are there for housing and employment. (How does it really look, for the "oh, no, they'll take our jobs" crowd? One example is this: A local mattress factory hires a percentage of refugee and immigrant workers...and also donates a percentage of mattresses for settlement houses.) 

 

Directories exist, y'all -- are YOU doing something? Check Ann Voskamp's blog. She just keeps providing links for HOW TO HELP. One of the links that keeps appearing is to local sources of help for all of us in Northern America, Australia, and other UK nations. These local places are the way for those of us without a lot of $$$$ to donate, to get involved, because they need hand-me-downs (clothes and household goods) and t-i-m-e to help with the monetary donations that wealthier people give. They need boots on the ground, in our own cities.

 

My family is also diverting some funds that we thought were really necessary, but turns out we can spare them, for international efforts.

 

My next steps are to have a conversation with our youth minister at church. We can do service projects for the world relief org. in our city, we can do a ballcap and sneakers drive for the Syrians on Lesvos, we can skip the fall retreat and have a weenie roast instead, sending all that money to the Mennonite Central Committee...it's time. Our children should hear and understand that this is the biggest refugee crisis since WWI. There must be a response.

 

Check Exodus Immigration Refugees, Samaritan's Purse, Mennonite Central Committee, and all the opportunities available on Ann Voskamp's blog and wherever else you are following this. Help.

 

I would love to see this thread turn into a catalog of how homeschooling families and their communities are helping. I really would.

 

[BrookValley.]

As with us all, your personal philosophy, your worldview, colors your interpretation of the facts at hand.  You find Glen Beck (not sure I spelled his name right, but whatever) repugnant for offering aid to Christian families.   From reading upthread, it's a bit unclear who the aid is going to, as there is some ambiguity in what the organization itself has said it is doing.

 

Let's assume that he is indeed offering help only to Christian families.  I can think of several entirely legitimate reasons for that, primarily because it takes resources on the ground to accomplish something, and I know from a podcast and a video or two, months and months ago, that he or people close to him have been involved in a geographical area in which the aggressors are ISIL, and the displaced and beleaguered refugees from that area who need help are not Muslims, they are Christians and Yazidis.  

 

I don't find it offensive at all for someone to be involved with helping people in a certain area, or working with a certain people group or population, and therefore declaring that your efforts will help such and such.

 

I'm really tired of people -- both in the world at large and also on this board -- being so easily offended and always finding reasons to disparage and malign others, not just their work, but their motives.  Several in this thread have disparaged Glen Beck, but honestly, he and his organization are acting.  Good for them.   (Now if we found out that his or any other  organization was keeping half the money for admin costs, then I'd be :glare:. )

 

I am not saying this to defend Glen Beck.  I'm saying this so that we might be better people by seeking first to understand (an old Dale Carnegie quote, but a very wise life principle).  

 

My point has absolutely nothing to do with a specific group having a specific focus and specifically helping persons within said specific focus. Of course we will probably first look to our own communities, our church families, etc., when supporting a charity, donating to a cause, etc. Of course we may find that a particular area or community really speaks to us, and we may focus there. That's absolutely not my point at all. My point is few of the refugees are Christian. Most are Muslim. To concentrate only on the Christian families means you're ignoring the majority. I'm speaking specifically about this humanitarian crisis happening right now. I'm actually just grossly oversimplifying the issue, really. These are PEOPLE. Period. 

 

Also, don't tell me I find Beck repugnant for offering aid to Christian families. That's not even remotely what I was getting at, and everyone reading this knows it. Anyone who isn't a sorry excuse for a human being wants the atrocities committed against Christians and ANYONE else in this region stopped. 

[BrookValley.]

<snip>

 

I would love to see this thread turn into a catalog of how homeschooling families and their communities are helping. I really would.

 

Yes, please. 

[6packofun]

 

 

I did a little digging and found that there is an awful lot of help for refugees in my city. The machinations are in place -- transitional help of all kinds, ongoing support of all kinds. The partnerships are there for housing and employment. (How does it really look, for the "oh, no, they'll take our jobs" crowd? One example is this: A local mattress factory hires a percentage of refugee and immigrant workers...and also donates a percentage of mattresses for settlement houses.) 

 

 

 

And the people being helped are refugees from THIS crisis or refugees in general as they trickle in?  (I'm sure some would say who cares, but we are talking a specific situation here.)

 

There will always be migrants, immigrants, and refugees.  If we want to help with THIS crisis, there may be limited resources in our particular area.  How do you suggest we find places like the mattress factories, for example, doing this work? (I'm seriously asking.)  I'm extremely cautious of places that want my money and claim to help, so that makes things difficult along with the idea that my $5 is going to make much of a difference.  :(

[sewingmama]

Well before we can help them we have to let them in first ...which is unlikely in Australia.

 

The Prime Ministers comment..."See I was right when I said turn back the boats and show no mercy" translation...thank goodness we don't have dead children washing up on our beaches or I would have to do something about it

 

The Public... we are full..we have taken in enough refugees and we certainly don't want any more terrorists/ Muslims

 

The Newspaper Columinists...yes that little boy dying was sad but it was his Dads fault ...he wasn't really a refugee ..they were safe in Turkey so they had no right to leave...

 

 

No right to leave...the family had been living in a tent in a dirt floor camp waiting for something to be done so they can get on with their lives. The father was not allowed to work as he had no work visa, the kids were not allowed to go to school as they were not citizens. After two years of sitting around in a tent waiting for something to happen he had every right to try and leave to make a better life for his family. What are they supposed to do...wait around like cattle until " someone gives them appropriate visas" or the Turkish government decides to accept all 1.2 million of them as citizens ( unlikely) or wait till someone stops the war in their country ( again unlikely).

 

These people have been waiting long enough. Yes they threw food rations and water back at Red Cross and demanded entry to Austria...I would two after years of living in a tent and belonging nowhere with nothing being done for me. They want real solutions...not temporary handouts.

 

I really drives me crazy when people say they are safe in Turkey and they should stay there. They have a right to work and educate their kids and not live in a tent on Red Cross handouts. They have waited and no one was helping them ...now they are trying to help themselves.

 

Turkey has done their fair share. Lebanon is also taking in Palestinians as well as Syrians. A large majority of the refugees are actually Afghani's not Syrians... but the Media has chosen to focus on only one group. 1300 Syrians died in a nerve gas attack a few weeks ago....more then half were children... why should they stay.... and why should they stay in Turkey for endless years displaced and not able to move on with their lives.

 

I can't see why they can't get temporary visas at least to work and go to school and get on with their lives.. until it is safe to go back. Their visas could be renewed yearly or something... until it is safe to return home.

[Guest]

Good article about this in the wsj today. I think it was a pretty fair assessment of some of the current issues in Europe:

http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-wests-refugee-crisis-1441561678

[Ausmumof3]

Well before we can help them we have to let them in first ...which is unlikely in Australia.

 

The Prime Ministers comment..."See I was right when I said turn back the boats and show no mercy" translation...thank goodness we don't have dead children washing up on our beaches or I would have to do something about it

 

The Public... we are full..we have taken in enough refugees and we certainly don't want any more terrorists/ Muslims

 

The Newspaper Columinists...yes that little boy dying was sad but it was his Dads fault ...he wasn't really a refugee ..they were safe in Turkey so they had no right to leave...

 

 

No right to leave...the family had been living in a tent in a dirt floor camp waiting for something to be done so they can get on with their lives. The father was not allowed to work as he had no work visa, the kids were not allowed to go to school as they were not citizens. After two years of sitting around in a tent waiting for something to happen he had every right to try and leave to make a better life for his family. What are they supposed to do...wait around like cattle until " someone gives them appropriate visas" or the Turkish government decides to accept all 1.2 million of them as citizens ( unlikely) or wait till someone stops the war in their country ( again unlikely).

 

These people have been waiting long enough. Yes they threw food rations and water back at Red Cross and demanded entry to Austria...I would two after years of living in a tent and belonging nowhere with nothing being done for me. They want real solutions...not temporary handouts.

 

I really drives me crazy when people say they are safe in Turkey and they should stay there. They have a right to work and educate their kids and not live in a tent on Red Cross handouts. They have waited and no one was helping them ...now they are trying to help themselves.

 

Turkey has done their fair share. Lebanon is also taking in Palestinians as well as Syrians. A large majority of the refugees are actually Afghani's not Syrians... but the Media has chosen to focus on only one group. 1300 Syrians died in a nerve gas attack a few weeks ago....more then half were children... why should they stay.... and why should they stay in Turkey for endless years displaced and not able to move on with their lives.

 

I can't see why they can't get temporary visas at least to work and go to school and get on with their lives.. until it is safe to go back. Their visas could be renewed yearly or something... until it is safe to return home.

It looks like this is being discussed now.

[Camelfeet]

 

 

What steps, if any are being taken to resolve the problems in Syria so that its people can live there safely at some point? If Syria cannot resolve this, do other countries who are dealing with the results have an obligation to step in and take over? Not a popular view either I suspect.

 

Considering at this point Syria is just as much a proxy war as a civil war..  other countries have an obligation to deal with the consequences since military action and the funneling of funds and arms from other nations to both assad regime and rebel forces have allowed the conflict to get to the point it is now.  This is just as much assad vs rebels as it is Iran, Hezbollah, Russia vs Saudi, Qatar, US, Turkey, Eu....  And then you have to ask how much are outside forces responsible for the mess in Iraq, and what role the destabilization of that country played in the creation ISIS, and what effect that has had on the current refugee crisis in Syria.  

 

Any additional 'stepping in' in the form or military action or aid given to one side in this conflict is going to be met with increased foreign funds from other sides.               

 

[Murphy101]

Considering at this point Syria is just as much a proxy war as a civil war.. other countries have an obligation to deal with the consequences since military action and the funneling of funds and arms from other nations to both assad regime and rebel forces have allowed the conflict to get to the point it is now. This is just as much assad vs rebels as it is Iran, Hezbollah, Russia vs Saudi, Qatar, US, Turkey, Eu.... And then you have to ask how much are outside forces responsible for the mess in Iraq, and what role the destabilization of that country played in the creation ISIS, and what effect that has had on the current refugee crisis in Syria.

 

Any additional 'stepping in' in the form or military action or aid given to one side in this conflict is going to be met with increased foreign funds from other sides.

I know that and agree.

 

I have said for some time now that we are heading to world war. The only question is what will be the Zimmerman telegram or Pearl Harbor prod to get the USA fully vested this time. In the mean time, everyone wants to be in comfortable denial. These countries have to decide what they want for themselves as a nation, as allies, and be willing to make it happen. There's no peaceful diplomatic options left.

[Carol in Cal.]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3232744/We-t-German-authorities-call-urgent-action-migrant-crisis-locals-say-Munich-brink-humanitarian-disaster.html