Swedish minister 'tired' of refugees from Greece

http://www.google.com/search?source=ig&...mp;aq=f&oq=

The buck stops in Greece. The problem should be stopped at source.

The problem is that one cannot break one commandment in order to fulfil another commandment.

.In that case Tobias Billström of the Conservative’s Alliance who should know better and hopefully does know better feeling the way that he does, is in bed with Jimmie Åkesson the leader of the Sverige Demokrater as in this instance – so it would appear – they are both saying one and the same thing. Therefore, what we cannot say of them (Billström and Åkesson) is that they are “strange bedfellows”

Perhaps it would be a good idea to appoint Jimmie Åkesson to the cabinet position of Sweden’s new no nonsense Minister of Immigration as it’s certain that he would not perform bad-ly at all in that post, since immigration is a problem that should not be treated lightly and as we know so well – whatever country in the EU is currently experiencing problems with immigration, desperate problems need drastic remedies.

I am not being facetious or remotely being racist: Billström could bite the bullet, cross the carpet and join Sweden’s Sverige Demokrater.

http://www.friends-partners.org/oldfriends...n-proverbs.html

first the control of border needs some one positive and broad minded not a racist idiot with narrow minded one way agenda and hate.

Perhaps it would be a good idea to appoint Jimmie Åkesson to the cabinet (that is the stupidest thing to say with all due resepct)

EU should make strict rules on Greece or out of EU any how they burder EU.

That is one way, to treat wrong things we dont bring worse things to fix them.

"Perhaps it would be a good idea to appoint Jimmie Åkesson to the cabinet position of Sweden's new no nonsense Minister of Immigration"

Fantastic idea!

Wake up the local, what does this mean "and will not asylum seekers".

Sam1 @ Post #3

As things are today it is not only the most preposterous thing to say, since Billström would be most unwilling and Åkesson probably wouldn’t welcome the idea of Billström taking shelter under the SD’s ideological umbrella either perhaps with the fear of “beware of Greeks bearing gifts”

Billström and Malmström’s exasperation is understandable.

Many of the refugees, who have been granted asylum in Sweden, have come from Iran, the Middle East – through Jordan - and through Turkey – (and perhaps through Greece) to Sweden.

It’s not as if the government is diametrically opposed to SD immigration policy. It is really a question of degree > SD is very serious about this and would like to cut immigration down by 90%. Even if by popular acclaim Jimmie Åkesson becomes Sweden’s next Prime Minister or minister of immigration, he will probably have to negotiate with the other parties who might be willing to meet him half way – or even settle for a 25% reduction in the intake of immigrants.

His 90% is a way of highlighting the seriousness of the matter as he sees it. How economically sound such a policy would be for Sweden, has to be researched and presented to all who are truly concerned about such matters.

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_quer...ration&aq=f

Tobias Billström what exactly have you done for Sweden and the tax payers money?

Another typical Swedish bureaucrat.

Hurray hurray...the guys drafted Dublin must laughing from their backs

and the guys said yes sir yes sir 3 bags full sir ,must be scratching their backs.

guys this is not something local politics, in fact international "POLI TRICKS"

1) why EU gave millions of euros to Libya recently ?

2) EU resolved embracing Albania while Turkey looks on

3) T may feel or expect 1 & 2

4) activate contingency plan to purify the asylum pool (amend dublin 11)

5) give a temporary injection to the patient with a blind eye..

Well, consider yourself lucky Sweden ... here in California we have as many as three million illegal aliens (thats basically a third of your entire population), and the government basically does nothing about those living in the country illegally. Even if people come out and say "I'm here illegally" nothing happens to them, because "that would be mean."

playing double game here, agents who bring them here in sweden form turky via greece, are working in swedish army in afghanistan at the moment,pleace look inside your country before point the finger

border police catch the one guy but they said they can not do nothing who take the money form poor guy to bring him here in sweden, see your laws and than talk

wake up please before its to late

I find this situation most confusing. My take is that on the one hand the Swedish Government will not abide by the EU rule: that the illegals should be returned to the Country of entry and yet they then speak of sending these illegals back to an intermediary country that they passed through to get to "The Land of Milk and Honey"( aka benefits). Is it me or is this all a bit of a "dogs breakfast?".

The problems with EU countries are that they tend to close one eye when it comes to immigrants on their shores,save them gives them food and shelters and after

they are fit and strong,show them the way to their final destinations.These immigrants are smart and lives on the naive innocent EU countries,whereby,they

get rid of their passports upon reaching EU country shores.99 % are economic

immigrants and if they political refugees facing dead back home,then it is anybody

's guess why only to EU countries and not some peaceful Asian or African states.?

Simple,the Asian and African states are peaceful but then they need food and of

course monthly or weekly allowance.

"the asylum seekers may be sent to the countries that they passed through on their way from Greece to Sweden", it's a long way from Greece to Sweden and almost everybody pass through some countries in between!

First, the asylum immigrants and refugees, who leave their countries for political reasons don't emigrate regularly; for example Iranians, who mostly left under 80s to early 90s, reduced sharply after the end of the war.

Secondly, there are different kinds of refugees, some for economical reasons, others for political reasons or war emigrate, and in Sweden the acceptance base on political and humanitarian reasons, which means if there is not war in their countries then their case would be refused.

Third, how the host country behave with the refugees, and the kind of information that the refugees get about the host country, is important to the received percent of asylum seekers in a country. As an example Sweden has been very hospitalized under 80s, and refugees were not very good informed about Sweden; so, many applied for asylum and attracted to here. In contrast when refugees are informed that their chance is low and life in Sweden is not as wonderful as it is has been broadcasted; the interest to move here would reduce.

ok ok what the heck , greco-roman empire know for its brilliant science and incredibly violent monarchies and religous conotations, was conquered by the generals of germania, thoes were the 'dark ages' thats what the movie 300 was all about 300 scandinavia russia germans ( longtime ago it was just nordic people) that beat rome to a

pulp because they were spreading wars criminals and evil all over the mediterranean. persia had been at war with rom for a thousand years , the arrayans(persia) modern day iran. history is simple its just totally strued with us roman propaganda we have a 6'3 president named obamma hussein 8 years after 9/11 gimme a break. sweden mined most of the ore for ww2 so hitler could build his stuff. which wasnt his point he just didnt want stupid ugly cities

everywhere and

money screwimg up peoples lives and to protect blonde white ooooolllllllld peoplw this planet is so messed up right now, damnit sweden i need polotical assylum my names Devin, im your blood help

me, god this is just out of control crazy these days.

@ demils

I am an "old, blond, white" person and money has not "screwed" up my life! I wish I had more.t.

P.s. You need to work on your spelling an grammar a bit.

Post #9 makes a good point. The state of California (which has roughly the same land mass as Sweden) is being inundated with a flood of illegal aliens who are coming mainly from Mexico. Once there, many are working for wages "under the table" or as the Swedish say "black" and not paying taxes to support the extra pressure they place on the public schools and health care system. This is putting a huge burden on the state's finances and California is in terrible financial distress.

The same thing could easily happen to Sweden if prudent immigration and asylum seeking policies aren't planned for and followed. It is commendable and right to help out people from other lands who are not as fortunate but it must not be done willy-nilly. If a lifeboat is filled over capacity, it capsizes and all are lost.

what a loser

lol... what a retard... Greece has a coastline with length roughly half that of Africa. So I doubt that even if every man in the country was employed by the border police, it would create a force large enough to guard every single piece of coastline.

That the army or the navy should be sent to do the trick, it's just insane. The army consists of 19 year old conscripts who's first reaction upon spotting an immigrant would be to shoot on sight, because you can't be sure if it's an immigrant or some smuggler with guns/drugs/prostitutes... so they'd shoot first and ask questions later.

I can't believe retards of this kind are on public payroll... ha.

Give them a couple gunships. Start mowing the invaders down, they will quit trying!

The greek's can't even take care of themselves! So, why have these expectations of them. You voted them into EU, so you are stuck with them.

Typical response: when in doubt, do nothing.

@ Dillner

"P.s. You need to work on your spelling++++ an +++grammar a bit."

AND grammar. LOVE the irony involved in this situation :D

This guy seriously needs to step outside Sweden now and then and see what the world is really like before shooting accusations right and left.

Greece is the only EU country that does not share borders with any of the other members. It is also the only country in the EU that has "hostile" borders. Turkish ARMED jetfighers and warships invade Greek airspace and waters daily just to test the waters and create the notion of contested territory (i m talking miles behind the line of Greek islands off the coast of Asia Minor here) and the government is spending huge amounts of money to respond to these threats. What is the reaction of our fellow EU members? But of course to sit back enjoy the show and push Greece in raising huge debts to buy arms from Germany-France-USA.

Mr Tobias also found out there s such a thing as FRONTEX? Wow! I m impressed. Is he aware of the fact that turkish warships, radars and jetfighters consistently harash FRONTEX crews and drive them away from sites that also happen to be popular immigrant-smugglers' drop off points? The Greek government has brought the subject up numerous times in NATO and the EU. Has anything happened about it? With Turkey sporting the third (i believe?) largest army in the world behind USA and China, while sitting on an oil-crossroad, not really...

Geez.

ponderer ,

Whilst you are busy putting Turkey in the box, Jack Straw (the UK’s Foreign Secretary 2001-2006) has written a strong opinion entitled “No ifs or buts, Turkey must be part of the EU” in today’s The Times (print edition). It’s subtitled “Cyprus is just an excuse for those who cannot stomach the accession of a Muslim country.”

Immigration Minister Tobias Billström is ”tired” of refugees from Greece – and we are to assume that in Billström’s ministerial boots or shoes, Jimmie Åkesson would also be saying that he was “tired” of refugees from Greece. They are both tired of it; perhaps Åkesson is even more tired than Billström (about this)

In the immigration minister’s boots he would also probably be quoted as saying without exaggeration that

"The conditions in Greece are very alarming,"

And very legally speaking (as per EU rules) would have no choice but to be helplessly saying like Billström,

"The people who cannot be sent back to Greece will perhaps be sent to other EU states if they admit that they have come from these countries to Sweden,"

We are to suppose that a difference between Billström and Åkesson at this juncture, could be that whereas Tobias Billström adds,

"We will not stop the asylum process. What is needed now is a discussion on whether these cases should be tried in Sweden or not. It is a process the Migration Board has ahead of it," -

Jimmie Åkesson

would be more likely to be saying “I told you guys that we have an immigration problem on our hands and for saying so you call us racists. Once again, what we need is a good discussion on how to handle this matter. Well, we would like to halt the asylum process until the Migration Board has come to a decision as to the way forward with this matter.”

Or some such words.

Or he could get his press secretary to help him out with some more eloquent language.

Cornelius Hamelberg "The buck stops in Greece. The problem should be stopped at source." Agreed, but how? There are basically 3 options: a) no matter what , do not let them enter Greece. Shoot them, let them drown or whatever b) pay someone else(like Quaddafi) to do the dirty job and stay clean c) Admit them in and send them back(where they do not want to go) or to another EU country who wants them. Is Sweden volunteering? I see no other way, because a country with a population of some 10 mil and huge financial difficulties cannot accept 2 mil illegal immigrants just because it happens to be a frontline state. And although Greece has been run dismally, its fiscal problems are also partly caused by the EU's whistling away when Greece is struggling with defence issues-the EU's position is "you must follow our wise directives, such as wasting money on 'independent agencies' and regulators, abolishing mandatary military service and so on, but if this brings you disaster, tough luck". Why is is so hard to have a policy that "an attack on any one EU member is an attack on us all and we will all respond ". That way Greece would have saved huge amounts on defence.

Question :

How come Finland does not have the kinds of immigration problems that Sweden has?

Answer:

It must be because of sound immigration policies.

http://www.google.com/search?q=Finland+and...e4981d5b2340072

“an attack on any one EU member is an attack on us all and we will all respond ". That way Greece would have saved huge amounts on defence.” –

If you are referring to Turkey – then it is not Turkey’s intention to eat up Greece. Turkey may not be in the EU yet, but we must not forget that Turkey is one of the most important members of NATO, that Turkey has a formidable air force and the biggest land army of all the NATO countries in Europe. You are surely not suggesting that Turkey should not be a member of NATO?

An assurance and consolation is – in the words of Per Ahlmark, to the effect that a democracy does not attack or wage war on another democracy. So, let’s increase democracy everywhere – to stop the exodus from political & economic oppression in the South - to freedom & milk & more honey in the North.

The more economically successful EU countries have similar immigration problems since everybody (mostly from the South) wants to emigrate to where the milk and honey is and in the journey from the South their first port of arrival in Europe is statistically, Turkey and Greece, on the way further up North, where the economic pastures are greener, such as in Germany, Holland and Sweden

Unimpeded/ uncontrolled immigration – not only to Sweden but to the rest of a Europe that is grappling with precisely the same problem, will within a hundred years or so result in Eurabia.

For those who do not believe in Eurabia, I recommend that they open their eyes because, “in order to dream you gotta still be asleep.”

http://www.google.com/images?hl=en&exp...ved=0CDcQsAQwAg

Kuffar,

4U2laff:

http://mauryk2.files.wordpress.com/2010/06/eurabia-map.jpg

It stands to reason that to stem the flow of immigration, the frontline states have to be the buffer zone – and the Frontline States of Turkey, Greece, Italy, France, and Spain should be given more resources to combat the problem – sending back people directly when they fall short of basic requirements. INTERPOL is working hard to bust some of the people smuggling syndicates, that have been operating for decades……

http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http:/...%26tbs%3Disch:1

Billström is just scapegoating other nations. Perhaps he should consider changing parties and joining Höglund in the Party of Swedes rather than pretend to care for human rights. The blunt truth is Sweden (and other EU nations) took the easy route. We all dumping them back on other EU nations for years and looked the other way. Most people who follow this refugee problem very well knew years ago Greece was already experiencing problems with refugees dumped on them from all over Europe (as well as massive numbers of new arrivals).

Those refugees didn't start in one nation. They started in second or third world nations and passed through many countries to finally reach Sweden. Some hide behind the Dublin II agreement to avoid the difficult moral issue of what to do with unskilled refugees. Dublin II is clearly flawed because it ignores the basic topology and geography of Europe. It pretends that countries like Sweden (that at last check do not border the second and third world) will ever face immigrants on the scale of EU border nations.

Hammer Greece for their fiances but Billström is being intellectually dishonest by attempting to pawn off moral responsibility for most of the EU's refugees solely on the shoulders of a single EU nation with roughly the population of Sweden (and with already over a million illegals in their country). If the EU project is to work (and if we also want to maintain our national identities) immigration must be view from a sustainable holistic perspective. At the moment the EU has no coherent (i.e. functional) policy for handing the flood of refugees from the third world. We obviously can't let them all in (or else there would be no EU left) so here are my own views as to what needs to be done.

1. Frontex will need to be permanently more active in EU border nations. Prevention is the single best and cheapest tool.

2. Much like with Texas and Arizona in the US, much larger holding facilities should be created in border states (managed mostly by Brussels rather than the host nation as is currently the case). If this does not happen then those border nations will have nowhere to put the masses of illegals currently walking the streets who will have babies and make things even more difficult down the road (again consider the current US troubles). It's not just Greece's problem as those illegals will eventually find their way to Sweden too (as they do now)

3. Better load balancing for processing asylum seekers between EU nations (also taking into consideration the hidden variable that all the border nations already have masses of illegals). Any break in the link eventually effects all the EU due to easy mobility between EU states.

4. A streamlined deportation method needs to be established to quickly return those that don't receive amnesty to their original homeland. If deportations aren't fast it will only lead back to situations like the current one.

That’s all streamlined to regulate the keeping of immigrants OUT of Fortress Europe (behind both veil and curtain)

Other question is of how to create the conditions that would keep third world citizens

IN – at home - down south.

Again, the EU will have to spend…..

Moral obligations….

It's not about keeping people out Cornelius. Its simply about regulating the flow of immigration to sustainable levels that allow for integration. (i.e. to allow immigrants to eventually integrate as Swedes rather than think of themselves as something else) That takes time and requires those people participate in Swedish life not just cluster with other similar immigrants. (which is what happens if doors are opened too wide)

Most of the world is not like countries like America, Canada, and the US. We are ethnic nations that have history, traditions, and cultures that go back hundreds and sometimes even thousands of years. In the modern world of easy travel it would only take a couple of generations of open door policy to erase virtually any EU nation. EU nations see very little population growth compared to regions like China, India, Africa. the middle east. They could easily overwhelm our nations-turning us into the third world rather than us helping them become first world. (sort of like a legal invasion)

The immigration issues the EU faces aren't unique to it. Third world countries even worry about their own national character to us! There is a fine line between xenophobia/racism and trying to preserve ones national character. In my opinion, one does haven't to turn to either extreme. The best approach is moderation and honesty around the issues.

The Chaldean Christians of Iraq are now being victimised by militants with

their churches being attacked and bombed and many innocent worshippers were being killed.Hopefully,the Swedish Government and other EU Government take

in these helpless people on humanity grounds instead of taking in economic

and fake refugees.Have mercy on these helpless people.tq.