There is a caste structure in refugees

These ones are Kshatriya and Vaishya.

The ones from South the Mediterranean are Shoodra. Dark skinned. They are invited to go on a swim.

Kshatriya and Vaishya are picked up by scheduled busses. For free.

The whole system is called Western Christian Morality and Humanity.

More on that topic at ‘Naked Capitalism’s Why Don’t We Treat All Refugees as Though They Were Ukrainian?

By Sonali Kolhatkar, the founder, host and executive producer of “Rising Up With Sonali,” a television and radio show that airs on Free Speech TV and Pacifica stations. She is a writing fellow for the Economy for All project at the Independent Media Institute. Produced by Economy for All, a project of the Independent Media Institute

It was inevitable that when brown-skinned Afghan refugees fleeing war were turned away from European borders over the past few years, the callous actions of these governments would come back to haunt them. A whopping 1 million people have fled Ukraine from Russia’s violent invasion in the span of only a week. They are being welcomed—as refugees should be—into neighboring nations, inviting accusations of racist double standards.

Poland offers the most egregious example of national racism. Its government, whose nation borders Ukraine, has warmly welcomed traumatized Ukrainians, just months after turning away Afghans. If these optics weren’t bad enough, Polish nationalists have sought out people of color who are among the refugees fleeing Ukraine and violently attacked them. According to the Guardian, “three Indians were beaten up by a group of five men, leaving one of them hospitalized.” African nationals studying in Ukraine joined the exodus after Russia’s invasion, and have been stopped at the Polish border. Poland might as well erect a giant sign on its border declaring, “whites only.”

Full post here.

We switch to racist Germany and its welcoming culture towards refugees. Be prepared!

This is from a German newspaper of today.

There is a 26-year-old Pakistani woman who entered Germany in 2017. She was working as an educator in PAK. “Maybe I will train as a nanny or as a socio-educational assistant” in Germany. Germany is in dire need of these professionals, so you would expect they would do everything that she can fulfill her dream.

She had already passed the A1 German language course (which is not easy) at the Goethe Institute in PAK so the B1 in Germany felt pretty easy. She could not attend school in Germany because “I still had no recognition and therefore no right to do the language course”.

You already have a gut feeling where that is heading to, do you? I mean, this is racist Germany and they know how and where to place potholes.

After she was recognized as a refugee she applied for the B2 language test. She studied properly because the test is difficult. She had a good feeling. There, however, a nasty surprise awaited her: in the “listening comprehension” part, Bavarian dialect was spoken.

“I had never heard anything like this before and at first I didn’t know whether it was even German,” she says. Like her, other participants who felt the same about the part of the exam in Bavarian were as well surprised “, so the woman. “The teacher said we were the worst course she ever had.” She failed the test as did 10 out of 15. She has meanwhile succeeded.

Just imagine you are learning English and a test on which your future depends is held in Texan dialect or Scottish.

Despite multiple inquiries, telc GmbH in Frankfurt (apparently the company that runs these courses – they charge what price to the government???) was unable to give a reason as to why the Bavarian dialect was used in German language tests. On the websites of various language schools, however, it can be read that dialects are part of German cultural assets, which should be taught just like the German language itself. “You can prepare for this, for example, by watching a Bavarian television program or listening to a Bavarian radio program.” Ameeta would surely have done that too – if she had known what to expect.

And that is how you make money as telc GmbH can tell you. The question is, how many of those who failed had to give up and were sent shipping? Expecting from a refugee to be able to understand a dialect which even people in Northern Germany have difficulties understanding is, firstly, bonkers and, secondly, a sneaky way of having refugees fail. And ultimately getting rid of them.

“Fortress Europe is an illusion.”

This is from Takimag and we love their stuff.

“So declares the Financial Times in the closing line of its Saturday editorial: “Europe Cannot Ignore Syrian Migrant Crisis.”

The FT undertakes to instruct the Old Continent on what its duty is and what its future holds: “The EU will face flows of migrants and asylum seekers across the Mediterranean for decades to come.””

That is a clear and concise statement and prediction. Based on history. The question and the article’s title 

Is this how Europe ends?

In the 16th, 17th and 18th centuries, Spain, Britain, France and Portugal, and then Belgium, Italy, Germany and America, all believing in the superiority of their civilization, went out into the world to create empires to uplift and rule what Rudyard Kipling derisively called “the lesser breeds without the law.”

After two world wars, the rulers of these empires embraced a liberalism that now proclaimed the equality of all peoples, races, creeds, cultures and civilizations. This egalitarian ideology mandated the dismantling of empires and colonies as the reactionary relics of a benighted time.

Now the peoples of the new nations, dissatisfied with what their liberated lands and rulers have produced, have decided to come to Europe to enjoy in the West what they cannot replicate at home. And liberalism, the ideology of Western suicide, dictates to Europe that it take them in — for decades to come.

The colonizers of yesterday are becoming the colonized of tomorrow. Is this how the West ends?

Read in full here.

A sufficient risk density plus likelihood of being killed in a terrorist attack higher than 1:800 or 0.125% could get you asylum in Germany

This is a followup on this post with an interview of an immgration lawyer in Germany. I contacted Mr. Spanta because I had no idea such a ‘Danger quotient’ exists and would be used in a court. I was unable to find the ruling on Google. Silly me was looking under BGH and not BVerwG. Half an hour later he sent me the link.

The ruling is quite a read. No, it is quite a cynical read. It is about an Iraqi man seeking asylum in Germany and ultimately being refused and deported. I would not know of anybody who would seriously consider a visit of Iraq, but after this ruling I think, personally, I should reconsider based on the judges assessment. Or should I say recommendation? So here goes with the

Federal Administrative Court

in, oh fucking Lord, Munich. To be sure, this is not a single case ruling, this is the general concept of getting rid of asylum seekers. (what follows is a Google translate)

1. Paragraph 60 (7) sentence 2 of the Residence Act requires, for the assumption of a considerable individual risk, that the person concerned is at considerable risk of being harmed to the legal interests of life or limb.

2. In addition to the quantitative determination of the risk of killing and injury, an overall assessment that also recognizes the medical care situation is required to determine the required risk density. BVerwG, judgment of November 17, 2011 – 10 C13.10; VGH Munich (lexetius.com/2011,6475)

This being an Iraqi, heck, we don’t need a hearing. We do that over coffee and Baumkuchen.

In the administrative dispute, the 10th Senate of the Federal Administrative Court on November 17, 2011 by the presiding judge at the Federal Administrative Court Prof. Dr. Berlit, the judge at the Federal Administrative Court Prof. Dr. Dörig, Richter and Prof. Dr. Kraft as well as the judge at the Federal Administrative Court Fricke recognized without a hearing: The plaintiff’s appeal against the judgment of the Bavarian Administrative Court of January 21, 2010 is rejected. The applicant is ordered to pay the costs of the appeal.

 

[3] Due to the changed political situation in Iraq, the Federal Office revoked the refugee recognition on March 16, 2006 and at the same time determined that there were no deportation bans under Section 60 paras. 2 to 7 of the Residence Act.

That is an interesting statement by the court and one wonders what they were smoking in Munich. Here is the UN from Dec. 2006, “IRAQ STANDS ON BRINK OF CIVIL WAR, ‘VIOLENCE SEEMS OUT OF CONTROL’, SPECIAL REPRESENTATIVE TELLS SECURITY COUNCIL”

Hmm. Here Human Rights Watch about the situation in Iraq in 2005.

That suggests a fairly straight line in the development towards civil war back then.

[7] The Administrative Court rejected the plaintiff’s appeal by judgment of January 21, 2010 insofar as it refers to the pending request to ascertain prohibitions on deportation pursuant to Section 60 subsections 2 to 7 of the Residence Act. The appeal was admissible because there was a need for legal protection in order to determine a ban on deportation pursuant to Section 60 subsections 2 to 7 of the Residence Act, even though the plaintiff was now in possession of a settlement permit pursuant to Section 26 subsection 4 of the Residence Act. The granting of subsidiary protection status under Article 18 of Directive 2004/83 / EC could give the plaintiff an additional legal position. However, the appeal is unfounded.

Yeah, sure, why not? What could be the reason? Well, one could perhaps question whether such things as terrorist acts “could be classified as an armed conflict in terms of intensity and magnitude”? Oh, come on judges, that seems a little harsh.

With regard to Section 60 (7) sentence 2 of the Residence Act, the Court of Appeal stated that there could be a question as to whether the terrorist acts that had been ongoing in Iraq since 2003 and were combated by state security forces could be classified as an armed conflict in terms of intensity and magnitude.

However, do we really care – another piece of this delicious Baumkuchen perhaps? After all, this sucker from Iraq “was not exposed to any significant individual danger to life or limb” – Boy, is this cake good – and that “density of danger” was not so high.

In any event, the plaintiff was not exposed to any significant individual danger to life or limb. At his place of origin in Mosul, there was not so high a density of danger that practically every civilian was exposed to a serious individual threat simply because of their presence in the affected area.

OK, guys, might one be permitted to ask why?

This results from the number of attacks and the number of victims in relation to the population.

Oh yeah, right. So when someone here in the West kicks me in the nuts, I look around, see nine others and realize, hey, I am just one out of ten. Na, that didn’t hurt.

But hold on, the judges are about to reach maximum thrust.

The likelihood of being injured or killed in a terrorist attack in the province of Nineveh in 2009 was around 0,12% or around 1:800 a year.

What?? That sounds like a wellness oasis. Tell me more, judges, I am this close to booking a vacation.

There are no indications of a tightening of the security situation. The plaintiff was not aware of any individual circumstances that increased the risk. The prerequisites for the alternative national protection against deportation (section 60 (7) sentence 1 and section 60 (5) AufenthG) were also not met.

Can you please connect me to my travel agent, pronto.

The German court considers in all seriousness a risk of injury/being killed of 1:800 as a pretty safe environment.

In Germany the rate of being murdered is 0.8:100,000 (yes, that is one hundred thousand) according to SPIEGEL of 2018.

The cynicism of German courts knows no bounds because it gets even better.

[22] The court of appeal for the area of the city of Mosul denied a sufficient risk density for the assumption of a considerable individual danger. Based on the procedure for establishing group persecution in the field of refugee law (see judgment of July 18, 2006 – BVerwG 1 C 15.05 – BVerwGE 126, 243 Rn. 20 ff.) – based on current sources, it has the total number of refugees civilians living in the province of Nineveh and its capital, Mosul, by comparing the frequency of acts of arbitrary violence and the number of people injured and killed in the process. It found that the risk of being injured or killed in the province of Nineveh was approximately 1 in 800 for 2009 as a whole. It was unable to detect a trend towards a deterioration in the security situation (UA p. 12). His conclusion, based on these findings, that the plaintiff is not exposed to any significant individual danger to life or limb as a result of arbitrary violence when he returns to his country of origin, cannot be disputed in the outcome of the appeal.

In Iraq you may be hit by a bullet, perhaps even some bullets, you may be hit by an exploding bomb, yeah, but that’s no reason to panic because “the medical care situation in the respective area” is nothing to sneeze at. You probably might stand a chance the doctors can reassemble you. Cheer up, old bugger. The “level of the risk of damage threatening (you) is so far from the threshold of considerable probability that the deficiency cannot have any effect on the result”.

Has anybody ever seen a deficiency that has no effect on the result?

Reading this is nauseating, it is preposterous and sickening, it is evil. And these German creeps, and I am talking about all those insufferable Germans, want immigrants to aspire to the German Leitkultur.

If you are not already sick, the judges have another helping for you.

[23] It is true that – as the revision rightly criticizes in the approach – in addition to this quantitative determination, an overall assessment of the statistical material with regard to the number of victims and the severity of damage (deaths and injuries) among the civilian population is required (judgment of 27 April 2010 loc. Cit., Margin no.33). In any case, this assessment also includes the assessment of the medical care situation in the respective area, the quality and accessibility of which can determine the severity of physical injuries that have occurred, with a view to the injuries that are permanent. The lack in the procedure of the court of appeal remains without consequences in the present case. This is because the level of the risk of damage threatening the plaintiff as determined by the court of appeal is so far from the threshold of considerable probability that the deficiency cannot have any effect on the result.

Here is one sentence about the Germans from Ai Wei Wei I particularly like:

Ich kenne ihre Geschichte, weiß, wer ihre Großeltern sind.

I know their history, know, who their grandparents are.

He said “are”, not “were”. So true. And true in a thousand years.

ZEITmagazin ONLINE: “Did you feel welcome when you arrived in the eighties (in Germany)?”

Excerpt from an interview in DIE ZEIT (in German) with Aarash D. Spanta (born in Afghanistan). He was six when his parents and he fled to Germany. Today the lawyer is helping others to get asylum. (Google translate)

Right of asylum
“I find this discussion of values ​​partly hypocritical”

ZEITmagazin ONLINE: Did you feel welcome when you arrived in the eighties?

Spanta: It was ambivalent. I grew up in Aachen. At that time I was already noticeable as a non-German. But a lot doesn’t matter as a child. And I felt comfortable, had German friends, it was peaceful and the bus came on time.

ZEITmagazin ONLINE: Have you had any negative experiences?

Spanta: I had to go to the authorities for every step outside a narrowly defined area: to come with me on a school trip or to take a vacation job. I could talk for hours about everyday racism, about the constant question: Where do you come from? But I’m 44 now, I don’t want to talk about it anymore. My basic experience was that what went well, such as the fact that I graduated from high school and finished my studies, was seen as a successful integration of the host society. If something didn’t go well, it was because of my supposedly primitive, patriarchal, Muslim background.

How high is the HAZARD RATIO assessed that a refugee qualifies for asylum? Exactly 0.125%.

The Federal Administrative Court has ruled that the hazard ratio must be at least 0.125 percent so that someone can get protection as a refugee from civil war.

ZEITmagazin ONLINE: What is this danger quotient?

Spanta: The population of an area is related to so-called security-related events such as terrorist attacks and air strikes. The risk that a person may be injured or killed by such an event within a year must be 0.125 percent. So 1: 800. My guess is that this value was written down so that you never have to give this protection to anyone. Because it is rarely reached – for example in Aleppo, during the time of the reconquest by the Syrian army and the Russians. It was raining bombs.

ZEITmagazin ONLINE: In which cases do asylum seekers receive no protection because the risk is not considered large enough?

Spanta: Clients of mine who fled Afghanistan or Iraq have not been granted protection status on this basis. In Afghanistan, however, just over 3,400 people died last year as a result of so-called security-related events, and almost 7,000 were injured. The risk assessment does not take into account that people die of starvation as a result of the war, that mothers and children die before or after birth because of the lack of hospitals. These are reasons to flee anyway.

Sounds reasonable until … Afghanistan has a population of 37 million. So 46,250 people would need to die according to the BVerwG (Federal Administrative Court) to convince the court of a risk hazard.

Germany has a population of 82 million. If 3,400 people would be killed in a year by gangs, radical individuals, what have you, the country would be on fire and parliament stormed by citizens and the chancellor would fear for his/her life.

Back to Aarash D. Spanta.

ZEITmagazin ONLINE: How are your other clients received by German society? Do they feel welcome?

Spanta: It’s really mixed. Some immigration authorities harass my clients, others assure them that they can do an apprenticeship and get a residence permit. Some clients get along better, others less well.

ZEITmagazin ONLINE: What does it depend on?

Spanta: For example, if a family is quickly recognized and soon finds an apartment, then they feel welcome. They have arrived in the Europe they have imagined – a beautiful garden with a hedge, the children go to daycare. Single men, whose recognition rate is much lower, often find it difficult to find their way around. It is made difficult for them: they often have to live in asylum seekers’ homes for two or more years, four or five closely together. There they go crazy. My impression is that this is politically wanted. The aim is to make immigration into the labor market and social systems more difficult. You deny people access and destroy them.

Full interview here.