Dramatisk og barbarisk forskjell mellom flyktning og (ulovlig) asylant

Rita Karlsen i HRS har i dag er enkel, men svært fruktbar forklaring på forskjellen mellom asylstatus og flyktningestatus:

… Men det verste er kanskje likevel at flyktninghjelpen – av alle – ikke synes å se noen forskjell på flyktning- og asylinstituttet. En viktig del av flyktningregimet er at en kan krysse en grense ulovlig dersom en har reelt beskyttelsesbehov. Asylregimet handler om at en selv hevder å ha et beskyttelsesbehov og det er opp til mottakerlandet å bevise eventuelt motbevise om en har et slikt behov. her

Og Julie Dahle:

https://www.rights.no/2023/06/omfattende-asyljuks-1-135-personer-avslort-av-udi-i-fjor-alene/

Ikke rart da at så mange som kommer hit velger å skyte seg inn under asylinstituttet heller enn flyktningeinstituttet. Dette selv om jo «flyktning» burde implisere en høyere status enn «asylant».

Det burde være selvinnlysende at det er bedre grunn til å hjelpe en objektiv flyktning enn en som bare er «asylant». Det står mer respekt av den første enn den andre, slik forholdene nå engang er.

 

Man kan da spørre seg hvorfor «hele Europa» nå synes mer synd på asylanter enn på flyktninger og er villig til å betale skyhøyt mye mer for å ta inn asylanter enn flyktninger.

Man skulle jo tro at flyktningene eller asylantsøkerne selv ville foretrekke å kalle seg selv - eller bli kalt av andre – flykning fremfor asylsøker.

Men slik er det visst ikke. Det synes å være slik at det er mest stas å påføre vertslandene størst mulig utgifter, - for det gir best mulig maktpotensiale - mest mulig forvirring og lengst mulig og både søker og giver synes nå å ha blitt underforstått enig om at det er slik og at det slik det burde være. Jo fler, jo bedre, jo større kostnader, jo bedre.

Man forutsetter at det er edlere å hjelpe asylsøkere enn flyktninger. Men hvorfor? Jo, fordi lidelsen synes å være mye større blant asylantene enn hos flyktningene og fordi det ofte er vanskelige å fastslå at forholdene i de landene der innvandrende kommer fra virkelig driver forfølgelse, enten den er mer tilfeldig eller den er mer systematisk. Uansett: De som vi tror lider mest, skal ha best og først hjelp. Lidelsen i seg selv blir da den sikreste rettskilde, både for de ankommende og for vertslandene.

Men dette betyr at de servilt betinget emosjonelt korrekte holdningene får råde grunnen alene. Det fins ingen plass for fornuften lenger. Den er opphevet, tror man. Man kan ignorere den, fordi vi ikke skal tore annet, og dette betyr at vi er inne i selvsensurens tidsalder der alt i grunnen styres av emosjonene, og der til slutt det hele blir et nødvendig spill om makt, og hvor da den som kan føle mest kan etablere legitimitet for at «makt gir rett». Vi kan derfor frykte mer kaos, flere uløselige dilemmaer, fler interessekonflikter og mye mer angst og uro fremover, fordi fremtiden blir bare mer og mer vilkårlig, mer uberegnelig, mer omskiftelig og porøs, og da mer og mer gjenstand for manipulatorenes kyniske opportunisme og demagogenes beregnede nihilisme i kaoset og alle forvirringen.

Det var slik situasjonen også var før Stalin og Hitler kom på banen, men i dag synes det store flertall å gi blanke: Det angår ikke Meg, Megesen. «Wir schaffen das», som merkelige Merkel sa.

Noen i dagens hete mener for fullt alvor at det skal være forbudt å snakke om «ulovlige» asylanter, fordi det kan krenke noen – og forutsetningsvis da at alle er «lovlige» - hvilket selvsagt betyr garantert ruin, ikke bare for asylanter og flykninger, men for hele «systemet», hele kulturen. alle land og steder.

En sivilisasjon uten evne til å kategorisere ender selvsagt som en dekonstruert fylling. Like vel synes eliten mer tilbøyelig til å angripe kategoriene og selve kategoriseringen enn til å forholde seg rasjonelt til realitetene – og den sant bærekraftige humanisme. Vår elite søker i dag det inhumane fremfor det humane i og med den populistisk som bare fan begrunner alt på hypermagiske emosjoner fremfor sindig juss og autentisk religion.

Les følgende med frykt og beven:

https://www.israelnationalnews.com/news/372927

Today's right to asylum is the road to barbarism in Europe

Retrace the philosophical evolution of the right of asylum to understand how much it has become a weapon aimed at the European peoples.Op-ed

Giulio Meotti   Jun 18, 2023, 2:47 PM (GMT+3)

Éric Zemmour: “Today in France there are between 120 and 140 knife attacks a day! Per day! Look at the stats: in the 1960s there were 3 or 4 stabbings every two years. This is a change of population”.

French Senator Valérie Boyer reported 44,000 knife attacks in two years.

And now even Emmanuel Macron evokes "decivilization".

A few days ago in Annecy, a wandering and disoriented man from Syria terrorized a park by stabbing several children. An asylum seeker who was first received as such in Sweden ten years ago, and claimed the right to protection in Europe, where he has committed the worst acts of barbarism.

In the twenty years following the signing of the Geneva Convention on the right of asylum in 1951, France received 300 asylum applications a year. South Americans fleeing military dictatorships or Eastern Europeans fleeing communist tyranny. Leftist and anti-communist activists.

But everything has changed since the 70s. The number went up to 20,000 and 60,000 in the 1990s. In 2016, the figure passed the 100,000 mark. Now they come from Africa, Asia and the Middle East; a nonstop stream of mostly Muslim single men. These figures are found in the book by Smaïn Laacher, “a sociologist at the National Asylum Law Court”.

In 2014, then Swedish Prime Minister Fredik Reinfeldt invited fellow citizens to "open their hearts" to refugees from all over the world: "I ask the Swedish people to show solidarity, we will create a better world". A year later, the then Foreign Minister, Margot Wallstrom, said that Sweden was on the brink, not of a better world, but of the "collapse" of ours due to migration flows.

In Sweden they took in 10 men for every woman. Result? Almost every day there are attacks with explosives, shootings and stabbings. In early May 2023, Police Commissioner Anders Thornberg said that more than 1,000 people are initiated into criminal gangs across Sweden every year. Thornberg estimated that more than 30,000 people are now involved in gang violence in Sweden. The number of police officers in Sweden is 22,600. In Sweden, therefore, there are more criminals than policemen.

European law forbids the rejections of illegal immigrants crowding our borders: each person must be able to have their file examined before being eventually expelled. The illegal immigrant immediately becomes an "asylum seeker". They often destroy their documents as soon as they arrive in Europe. And when it is decided that they do not have the right to asylum? In 2020, there were 107,500 orders to leave French territory: less than 7 percent were carried out.

Meanwhile, asylum seekers show little love for Europe.

Instead, they are enforcing sharia law on the streets of Berlin, according to police, cited by the Tagesspiegel. The self-proclaimed "morality police" is made up of Chechens who use violence to discourage migrants from integrating into German society and promote the creation of a "parallel Islamic legal system" in Germany. The members of the gang, who also come from Russian Dagestan and Ingushetia with an Islamic majority, attack Muslims and non-Muslims, including Christian asylum seekers staying in reception facilities in Berlin.

On a regional train between Hamburg and Kiel, a Palestinian Arab asylum seeker stabbed two sixteen- and nineteen-year-old girls to death. Prior to that, an asylum seeker in Illerkirchberg, near Munich, killed a school-going girl (and seriously injured her friend).

Meanwhile, in Spain, a Moroccan Islamist struck two churches, killing the sacristan. Why is a Moroccan entitled to asylum?

The Tunisian (do Tunisians have the right to asylum?) Jamel Gorchene arrived as an illegal immigrant in France and was regularized in 2019. With two stabs to the throat and while shouting "Allahu akbar", the terrorist killed Stéphanie M., a police officer with two children aged 13 and 18.

-Lola, a young girl from Paris, was kidnapped and cut to pieces by a gang of Algerians.

-The military doctor Alban Gervaise had his throat cut to the cry of "Allahu Akbar" as he went to pick up his two children aged 3 and 7 from the Catholic school in Marseilles (where a Jewish teacher was attacked with a machete by a student who said he wanted to "to behead a Jew").

-René Hadjadj, an elderly Jew, was thrown from the 17th floor of his building by his Muslim neighbour.

-Another Jew named Jeremy Cohen was killed by a tram after escaping a beating,

-Sarah Halimi was thrown out the window, also by a Muslim neighbor, as was Mireille Knoll.

England does not know how to contain all the bounty of asylum seekers and also thought of a ship in the port of Liverpool. Social Democratic Denmark would like to send them to Rwanda.

Former Paris police chief Didier Lallement warns that France is headed for a "collapse" that will one day require troops to garrison the Elysée, the president's residence. In the book “L'ordre necessaire”, Lallement describes a "devoured" country, where "one out of two crimes is committed by a foreigner, who is often in the country illegally..It is clear that some of the newcomers are integrating to delinquency. All my experiences have me predicting a dark, very dark future for our children and grandchildren. The social convulsions will be intense and destructive... One day it will be necessary to mass troops in front of the Elysée".

But for our elites, the only way for Europe to stay true to its identity (and fall into the scenario described by the former French police chief) would be to welcome without reservation all those who knock on its door and even those who don't bother knocking.

There is a great unease even at the very idea of questioning the right to asylum or at least its terms. Conversely, anyone wishing to limit migratory flows would be betraying European identity.

"The adoption of the word 'migrants' as if it were self-evident, when instead the words 'refugees' or 'clandestine' had to be used because they belong to the political register, implies a duty to welcome and suggests, quietly, a right of credit towards us, weighed down by such a sense of guilt that we could redeem ourselves only with the opening of the borders to refugees from all over the world", explained Georges Bensoussan, historian and essayist former editorial director of the Mémorial de la Shoah in Paris, hauled to court for denouncing Islamic anti-Semitism.

The next step? Already accomplished. The city of Ghent, in Belgium, has removed the wording of "autochthonous" (indigenous rather than descended from migrants, ed.) to be more inclusive of minorities, which are increasingly demographically strong.

In 1961 a young Soviet prodigy, protagonist of the Leningrad ballet Kirov, who had just performed in Paris, refused to return to Moscow and rushed into the arms of the French policemen asking for political asylum. Asylum granted to him the same day. Rudolf Nureyev, with this stroke of genius, made the French proud of the asylum offered, of the welcome to those seeking refuge and protection.

It is enough to retrace the philosophical evolution of the right of asylum to understand how much it has become a weapon aimed at the European peoples. The right of originally asylum had the function of welcoming the great political dissidents, forced to leave their country because they were persecuted. From the Soviet Union: Andrei Sinjavski, Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, Iulij Daniel, Josif Brodsky, Vladimir Nabokov. From Poland: Czeslaw Milosz. From Romania: Mircea Eliade; Emil Cioran; Vintila Hora. From Albania: Ismail Kadaré.

But the human rights revolution, combined with the great migratory waves, has completely distorted the right to asylum, which has become a real migratory channel with the complicity of a cultural, political and journalistic class that sees the arrival of migrants as a sign of the times in line with their desire for “diversity”.

In 2022 alone, the European Union accepted 1 million asylum seekers (pre-invasion of Ukraine). The problem is that a quarter of the world's population could claim the same refugee status.

In his book “Immigration et Intégration: avant qu'il ne soit trop tard”, former Belgian senator Alain Destexhe reveals that from 2000 to 2010, Belgium welcomed more than 1 million migrants out of a population of 11 million. The right to asylum has turned into a "demographic time bomb".

Even Michel Barnier, the former EU chief Brexit negotiator and former Euro-Commissioner for Industry and the Internal Market, thus anything but a bad “populist”, said we should 'stop all immigration from outside the EU' EU for five years” and push the bloc to strengthen its external borders. “I think we need to take three or five years to suspend immigration,” Barnier said. Asked if his comments challenge his reputation as a moderate, Barnier concluded: "Immigration issues are not moderate."

The right to asylum has become a dangerous farce. It subverts a procedure foreseen for the reception of persecuted individuals to let in masses who are not persecuted: Tunisians, Egyptians, Pakistanis, Albanians… They use the language of the victims because today in woke parlance, the language of the victim has become that of the master.

And there is a penitential reflex. The West would have developed by plundering the world for five centuries: it owes its prosperity not to its own civilizational dynamics, but to its predatory behavior. Therefore, in a "decolonized" West, it would be simple justice for the South to return to the North. It would be a form of historical reparation.

What to do? The former head of the French secret services Pierre Brochand (Direction générale de la sécurité extérieure) explained it to the Senate: “Contain irregular immigration, dividing visas by 20 or 30, no longer accepting any asylum applications. Reducing the duration and number of residence permits and excluding automatic renewals. Strengthen our Christian secularism to adapt it to the challenge of Islam. If, on the other hand, we persist in our blindness, we will go to countries where, at the very least, life will no longer be worth living, or, at the very least, to a country where, by dint of explosions, we will no longer be able to live at all”.

Let's rewrite the immigration rules or Europe will fall into "atmospheric barbarism".

The German thinker Norbert Elias, who coined the word "decivilization" evoked a few days ago by Macron, said that humanity emerged from its violent past only when it realized that societies to be peaceful require rules, order and trust. The eighteenth-century palace seat of the French president bears the name of the Elysian Fields, which in Greek mythology were the final resting place of the dead. While fine wines are served in the Salon Murat, where Macron meets ministers every week, rules, order and trust are collapsing outside.