Monday, September 7, 2015


The announcement by John Key that the government is to allow 750 Syrian refugees into the country is to be welcomed. It is a developing humanitarian crisis of the first order and New Zealand has a responsibility as a good global citizen to help alleviate the problem.     

I suspect there will be debate around the edges over numbers with Labour and the Greens playing the 'my one is bigger than yours' game.   That's politics.   It's also politics that the government gets to make the call and, IMHO, it made the right one.   

Some additional comment.    I note that a supposed spokesman for the Syrian community called on the government to take 10,000 refugees.   Not sure that was overly smart.    I note too the joint statement by the Anglican and Catholic churches that they will take responsibility for looking after an additional 1,250 refugees over and above anything the government proposes.   Whose kidding who?    That they're going to underwrite the cost of travel, provide housing, furnishings, jobs, medical care etc, etc .... pour me a Tui.

One final point and on another thread one of our resident apologists for the dark side of politics made the following comment relating to people from the Middle East "..... The people of the middle east operate under different norms and to expect them to conform to our standards is a conceit....."

To that little pearl of wisdom I say bullshit.    If they come to my/our country, then I expect them to accept, respect and observe our norms as they stand today.



Noel said...

Aw come people within immigrant communities within NZ people are putting their cultural norms above ours. Two that stand out was the South African guy in the company I used to work for who on sighting the Maori security guard asked "why was that kaffir in the room" to the Somali woman who was always shunting her trolley at the supermarket into my nieces trolley. Once my relative had worked out the Somali perception that they were the highest of the dark races she simply shunted her back and that carry on stopped.
Didn't save the Pacific Islander at Otara with no media commentary on the reason behind the bust up.

There is probably many other examples if one searches hard enough.

Eric said...

Several years ago Lebanese immigrants decided that a particular Australian beach was their preserve, and their's alone. Australian surfers were able to bring that perspective back into line with how Australia sees itself.
It was just a matter of educating them.
Problem solved.

Anonymous said...

As to the call of BS, its a nice thought, but the reality from else where would seem to dictate that may not be the outcome.
If we were to take only those that are really being persecuted like the Christians and Zoroastrians then our chances of that assimilation happening is going to be profoundly increased.
Expecting muslims to integrate and accept our civilisations rules over their religious beliefs would require something to happen that has not yet happened since the first followers of the 7th century false prophet embarked upon their blood letting and supremacist, misogynistic idol worship.

Anonymous said...

Oh Dear and oh dear again, That little quote was mine and it was referring to the behaviour and cultural differences in their own country which is plain if you read it.

Quoting out of context and twisting an argument around is endemic on this blog site.

An apology is due I think.

Lord Egbut Nobacon

Howie said...

"If we were to take only those that are really being persecuted like the Christians and Zoroastrians ..."

Blah blah. This is the current talking point of the far right crazies. Most of those killed are Muslim, but the crazies (like your fellow bloggers Adolt an Gravetodger) are so fundamentally retarded they actually think Muslim=ISIS.

Anonymous said...

I wonder if I could help put an end to this nonsense about "no go" areas and an Islam take over in Europe.

JC said...

I think Key has made a mistake and read the wrong set of tea leaves.

NZers have strongly supported our troop deployment in Iraq and restated that recently in this poll..

I think we support this because we would rather fight the terrorists in *their* home rather than risk fighting them here or having to put up with people with dodgy refugee status. This article explains what most of us suspect and why Key has read us wrong..


The Veteran said...

Lord EN ... nah, you said it and it stands. You might want to shut your eyes to the reality that some (and I emphasize the word some) in the immigrant community refuse to accept the norms of their new home country if you like but I don't.

I repeat ... I endorse our taking of the additional refugees but it comes with that simple caveat

Anonymous said...

This m post, the subject was Gravedodgers complaint about the treatment of prisoners by ISIS.

"Good, now we are getting somewhere. As the Vet says we were operating under different norms and we are changed people through education and economic progress. The people of the middle east operate under different norms and to expect them to conform to our standards is a conceit.

It still does not mitigate the massacrer by disciplined troops or the lack of accountability. Even Henry V strung up a group of archers who had been looting from villagers just before Azincourt."

A you can see it clearly does not have anything to do with immigration or assimilation. I have noticed that in order to justify your position you sometimes quote out of context and you are never wrong. So I still believe an apology is in order.

Lord Egbut Nobacon

The Veteran said...

EN ... you acknowledge that change derives from education and economic progress with the implication that some middle eastern countries function in the virtual stone ages. And that's my point .... there are enclaves of immigrant populations in various countries who have no great respect for the norms of their 'adopted' country ... who advocate, for instance, for the introduction of Sharia law or who practice female circumcision or betroth their 8/9/10 YO daughters to older men in arranged marriages. If you want to defend their right to do this then fine with me ... sez more about you than me.

Redbaiter said...

When you grandchildren's children are dying in the civil war that will probably unfold across the West in the next five decades or so, I hope they have enough sense to remember who it was that started it all.

The self indulgent nancy boy narcissistic progs who invited a totally foreign culture into the country back at the turn of the century.

There's only one other alternative and that's total surrender. Probably quite likely going by how spinelessly their forefathers gave up the country in the first quarter of the new millennium.

And how little offspring they produced. 1.5 kids to the average family while the invaders have 8.

Anonymous said...

Statement of fact not a defence and somehow because I disagree with some of your outpourings I have been labelled a Labour supporter,. Not true, I'm a capitalist but with a social conscience.

See what I mean about twisting arguments. If someone points out the shortcomings of your article you demonise him/her by accusing him/her of having beliefs that they do do not have.

Lord Egbut Nobacon

Noel said...

Labeling is their trait. Happens all the time with me althugh I explained I don't follow any particular trough feeders. Looking for the "darkside". Tell me if you find it cause it's got me beat.