The moral outrage of the shroud wavers

And from Left foot forward we have this classic attempt at a fisk

In the latest ‘yes it’s sad, but..’ column to emerge since the death of Aylan Kurdi, Daily Mail columnist Richard Littlejohn assures us it’s nothing to do with us:

“Which brings us back to the child’s corpse on the beach in Turkey. I repeat, it’s awful. Heartbreaking. But it’s not our fault, and it’s not our responsibility, however compassionate we might feel.”

Littlejohn is keen to prove this lack of responsibility, but proves only his own ignorance.

Meanwhile you are just as keen to use any convenient tragedy to promote your agenda of of unlimited immigration.

Of many examples, here are the top 5:

1 . “Sorry, but while I accept that many are genuine asylum cases, most aren’t. What about those bouncing up and down outside Budapest station chanting ‘Germany, Germany’?”

At least half of the people risking their lives sailing across the Mediterranean are seeking asylum, according to Amnesty International.

EU figures show Syrians and Eritreans alone make up 46 per cent of those who reached Italy by boat last year. The numbers are likely to be the same for those now in Hungary.

Unless Littlejohn has information he’s keeping to himself, he’s wrong.

If 50% of those crossing the med are claiming asylum, and some of them are bogus (because some always are), then it would seem perfectly true in the strictest logical sense to state that most of these people aren’t genuine asylum claimants. The behavior of some of the groups of migrants (those in Budapest being a case in point) isn’t exactly helping their case either – these are hardly the actions of people fleeing to a place of safety (unless Hungary has suddenly got a whole lot more dangerous than it ever use to be).

2 . “Just as at Calais, 99 per cent of them are young men, aged between 15 and 25. Where are all the women and girls? If you were truly fleeing tyranny and certain death, wouldn’t you bring your wives, sisters, mothers and daughters with you, instead of abandoning them to their fate?”

It clearly hasn’t occurred to Littlejohn that the people arriving in Europe might be the only surviving members of their families. At least 200,000 have died in the Syrian war, including many women and children.

The reason many of those who reach Europe are male, in other words, is the same reason that they are young – they are the ones who made it out alive.

I think you may actually find that very many of those killed in Syria are young men – they tend to be the ones who stay and fight rather than run away. This effect certainly isn’t enough to account for the pictures we see showing such a huge percentage of the young men as refugees.

It’s also possible families languishing in refugee camps in the Middle East have send their young men to secure a safe place for them to move to – and a safe means of travel – for the rest of the family. All these reflections must be beyond Littlejohn, who appears incapable of empathy (or research).

Quite likely. But put bluntly, then they aren’t really refugees then  – they are economic migrants. Understandable, but not quite the same as people fleeing directly from Isis brutality.

3. “But here’s what puzzles me. They’d been living in Turkey for the past year. So why didn’t he [Alan Kurdi’s father] apply for asylum there?

Syrian government policy under Bashar al-Assad denies citizenship rights to Kurds. Since they have no passports, Turkish law says they are not entitled to move freely in the country under its temporary protection measures for refugees.

They had either to register at a Turkish refugee camp or live outside of it as ‘irregulars’. They chose to apply for asylum in Canada, where they had relatives, but the application was refused.

So, the Canadians didn’t think they were refugees either, and the Turks were willing to look after them, but instead they chose to risk all for a better life in Europe. That sounds like economic migrants to me, rather than conventional refugees.

4. “After all, surely culturally Syria has more in common with Turkey, another Muslim country, than with Tunbridge Wells or Trondheim.”

Not all ‘Muslim countries’ are alike, culturally or otherwise. He means: ‘Let them stay with their own kind where they will be happier’.

He perhaps has a little of a point. We currently have a massive problem in the UK with unintegrated Muslim communities – do we really want to make the problem worse, rather than encouraging Muslims to live in Muslim societies. I’m sure most of these refugees really want to integrate to British society, but unfortunately there will be a sizable minority that doesn’t.

No one knows anything for sure’. What’s ‘for sure’ is Richard Littlejohn doesn’t know what he’s talking about. But we knew that already.

Bit like you then…


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s