Iceland Government: "We'll take 50" Icelandic People: "Oh for Björk sakes! We'll take 10,000"

[Glassunion]

Iceland Caps Syrian Refugees at 50; 10,000 Icelanders Respond by Offering Up Their Homes

Iceland recently announced it was willing to help with the growing humanitarian disaster in Syria that is sending Syrians fleeing for safety by the thousand to Turkey, Europe, and beyond. The Icelandic government offered to take 50 Syrian refugees in Iceland a country of some 330,000 people. As far as offers of help go, it didn't come off as particularly heartfelt or overwhelming.

In response to their government’s paltry offer, Icelanders stepped up to try to fill the humanitarian void. Spurred on by a plea from a leading Icelandic author, more than 10,000 people in Iceland offered to host Syrian refugees on a Facebook page called “Syria is calling.”

<snip>

“I’m happy to look after children, take them to kindergarten, school and wherever they need. I can cook for people and show them friendship and warmth. I can pay the airfare for one small family. I can contribute with my expertise and assist pregnant women with pre-natal care.”

“I have an extra room in a spacious apartment which I am more than happy to share along with my time and overall support.”

Beautiful picture of Reykjavik at the story: http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2015/08/31/_10_000_icelanders_offer_to_house_syrian_refugees.html?bjorkbjorkbjork

[maxsolomon]

1. I don't know if I'd take them up on it. Iceland is very isolated.

Better to come to America - somewhere where there are other Arabs. Like Dearborn.

Are we taking ANY?

[KamaAina]

3. Jersey City would work nicely as well.

And good question. Maybe faith-based organizations could take the lead as they did with the Hmong people.

[Glassunion]

6. Well, having never been a refugee, I cannot say what I'd do.

However if in a country of just 329k people, the fact that 10k have offered up their homes, I might find that quite welcoming. I highly doubt the government is going to change much from their stance on 50 refugees total, to allowing thousands of families to open up their homes to thousands more refugees.

I just found the thought quite the boost to my faith in humanity.

The Republicans would never allow such an influx of non-whites into this country.

[erronis]

10. Arabs are caucasians as well as other races. The 'uglicans allowed Pushy Jindal in.

Not disagreeing with you about the 'uglican reaction. However, unless someone corrects me Syrians and others from the eastern Mediterranean (including Jews, Turks, Palestinians, Egyptians, Persians/Iranians, Afghani, Pakistani, Indians, etc., etc.) are all whites of differing hues. Just like people from Vermont (my home), Canada, Miami Beach, etc. Differing hues.

Heck, the 'uglicans wouldn't even allow their ancestors to get citizenship since it would probably mean in influx of people that cared about the world and governance.

[Glassunion]

14. I hear you.

However, they'd still all get lumped up into the "not-white-'Merican" category.

[RoccoR5955]

54. They might just change their tune if the people who said

that they were willing to house refugees and families were to sponsor them. Some European countries make a big deal if a person who wants to immigrate has a sponsor.

[Fred Sanders]

7. No. Iceland is not all that "isolated": some facts......

Reykjavik is served by 2 airports. These are Reykjavik Keflavik, Reykjavik Domestic.
London to Reykjavik is 1,897 km
$204 was the cheapest return price from London to Reykjavik last month
The average flight time from London to Reykjavik is 2h 55min
4 airlines fly direct from London to Reykjavik
There are 42 flights a week from London to Reykjavik
The most popular airline flying from London to Reykjavik last month was Icelandair

How can anyone not love Iceland:

Huldufólk (Icelandic hidden people from huldu- "pertaining to secrecy" and fólk "people", "folk&quot are elves in Icelandic folklore. Building projects in Iceland are sometimes altered to prevent damaging the rocks where they are believed to live. According to these Icelandic folk beliefs, one should never throw stones because of the possibility of hitting the huldufólk.

Icelandic gardens often feature tiny wooden álfhól (elf houses) for elves/hidden people to live in. Some Icelanders have also built tiny churches to convert elves to Christianity. President Ólafur Ragnar Grímsson has explained the existence of huldufólk tales by saying: "Icelanders are few in number, so in the old times we doubled our population with tales of elves and fairies."

[erronis]

11. And even better, Icelanders prosecute their criminal bankers!

AFAIK, Iceland is the only country who has tried the shysters that tanked their economy, and put a bunch in jail. And I believe the economy is doing much better now, thank you!

[Fred Sanders]

21. I was working my way around to mentioning that....Iceland is as Democratic liberal socialist as it gets.

[MADem]

24. They are picky picky picky about maintaining their "cultural integrity" though.

That's why they aren't opening the doors and letting thousands through--they are rather insular as a society on a good day.

And as far as I'm concerned, any place that limits what name you are "allowed" to give your child is NOT all that "liberal," even if they provide many cradle-to-grave services.

Still, it's a great place to visit--wouldn't want to live there year round, though.

[Fred Sanders]

26. Year round living as innocent civilian refugees fleeing death in hearth and home in the Syrian civil war is no picnic either.

The Iceland people have opened up their hearths and homes...who am I to judge?

[MADem]

27. Well, no, they haven't--they've said they'd be willing to do it, but their government isn't buying

off.

And odds are, they won't buy off, because they're, as I said, picky picky picky about mixing with other cultures. They love for you to visit, they don't want you to STAY.

It's not easy being brown in Iceland. Or black. One of the better first person accounts I've read on this issue:

http://grapevine.is/mag/column-opinion/2012/12/23/are-icelanders-racist/

[Fred Sanders]

31. I disagree with your link to the posted opinion. Icelanders are not racists,...as the OP proves. But you can

disagree, your opinion.

[MADem]

39. The Icelandic people are "insular" and protective of their culture. This is reflected in their

governmental decrees.

Would USA put up with this crap? I doubt it:

http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-21229475

In the case of Iceland, it's about meeting certain rules of grammar and gender, and saving the child from possible embarrassment. Sometimes, although not in every case, officials also insist that it must be possible to write the name in Icelandic.
There is a list of 1,853 female names, and 1,712 male ones, and parents must pick from these lists or seek permission from a special committee.

And then, there's this--not exactly terribly welcoming:

http://grapevine.is/news/2015/08/24/changes-to-refugee-and-immigration-law-proposed/

The Icelandic government could begin taking steps to abide international law where the treatment of refugees is concerned, if a bill currently in parliamentary committee passes as is.

Stundin reports that the committee, representing all parliamentary parties and operating under the leadership of Bright Future MP Óttar Proppé, has finished a draft of a bill proposing numerous changes to the Act On Foreigners.

Amongst those changes is that Iceland would stop arresting asylum seekers who arrive with false or altered documentation. Currently, asylum seekers who do arrive under these conditions are immediately arrested and taken into custody for up to 30 days.

This practice has been harshly criticised by the Red Cross, UNICEF and the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), and not just because many if not most asylum seekers fleeing war-torn countries do not have proper documentation, given their circumstances – the practice is also against international law.

And, as I said, picky-picky-picky (the Dublin regulation is when they send the person back to the last place they were before they got them): http://icelandreview.com/news/2013/10/23/vast-majority-asylum-applications-rejected-iceland

Vast Majority of Asylum Applications Rejected in Iceland

The number of asylum seekers in Iceland increased by 65 percent in the first nine months of this year compared to the same period in 2012.

Of the 137 applications, 48 were treated as Dublin cases (considered the responsibility of another state under the Dublin Regulation), 80 did not meet the requirements to be considered a refugee, eight were granted refugee status and one person was granted a permit on humanitarian grounds.

[Fred Sanders]

40. Looks like folks in Iceland would like to rewrite those outdated laws...as they did the financial laws.

I encourage them to do so...and you?

[MADem]

43. "And you?"

You plainly haven't read a damn word I've written, here.



If you think those racists are going to open their gates and let in all those MUSLIMS, I have a bridge to sell you--dirt cheap. Iceland has a nasty racist streak, notwithstanding 10,000 decent people who don't share their government's views.

Notice how the other 320.000 people on that rock haven't said a damn word? They ELECTED the guys who called Muslims a bunch of "rapists" who will ruin their country.

smh.

[pampango]

32. Their government may or may not 'buy' it but it is good to see liberals pushing for more refugees.

Iceland is a truly 'liberal' country.

[MADem]

44. No, it's not. It is a country with a lot of social programs, but they aren't very liberal in many

ways. In fact, they're overbearing and strict in many ways.

They prioritize their culture and language and "heritage" and anything that sullies it is verboten--like too many black and brown people, and "different" religions.

You're oh-so-welcome--so long as you are a tourist and will LEAVE in a reasonable amount of time.

[maxsolomon]

53. I wasn't bashing Iceland. Talk to people who've lived in Hawaii

and they'll tell you about how small and isolated it feels after a while. Despite being a tropical paradise.

Its in the nature of ANY ISLAND. If you have to take a jet plane to get off of it, it's technically isolated.

Plus, Iceland has a climate and culture utterly different than the one most Arabs have known.

In the long run, they'd be happier in America, even though we're the cause of a lot of their problems.

[geek tragedy]

2. they should probably confer with their peers in Denmark and Sweden

before getting too hasty or naïve about things.

[Lizzie Poppet]

5. Sadly, I have to agree.

[pampango]

8. There is a far-right backlash against refugees in both countries but they continue to bring in

large numbers of refugees given the size of their populations. Conservative governments like the UK, Hungary and others are much less welcoming.

I doubt Iceland's liberals will be slowed down by warnings not to be too 'naive'. Liberals hear that a lot.

[geek tragedy]

9. the problem is that it will turn Iceland's milquetoast centrists

into seething rightwing nationalists.

What are these people going to do in Iceland? they don't speak the language, have any cultural overlap, etc? There's no reason to think Iceland will do any better job of integrating them and their succeeding generations than did France or the UK.

Iceland is very much a place that believes in full gender equality. That's not a good fit either.

[pampango]

13. Liberals don't usually 'go slow' for fear of the reaction of 'rightwing nationalists' or

the fear that some of their countrymen will turn into 'rightwing nationalists'.

4 million refugees from Syria exist. Now most of them are in refugee camps in poor neighboring countries, Lebanon, Jordan and Turkey. That cannot continue. Conservatives want other countries, not their own, to take care of the problem. Liberals, some anyway, want their countries to step and do their share.

Refugees almost always come from countries with different cultures, races and religions than the countries where they seek refuge. Unless the far-right is correct and liberals are wrong, there is a way to welcome and integrate reasonable numbers of refugees into rich countries. Syrians are not that different from you and me, regardless of what 'rightwing nationalists' say.

[geek tragedy]

16. "there is a way to welcome and integrate reasonable numbers of refugees into rich countries"

"reasonable numbers" is the key issue.

In terms of scale, 10,000 refugees into Iceland would be the equivalent of 8.6 million into the US. With a culture/economic shock dwarfing the result of Latin American immigration into the US.

The solution is to send money to take care of these people in neighboring countries, and to reach a resolution in Syria so they can return home.

[Glassunion]

17. Actually, it would work out to about 1 million

US Population is almost exactly 1,000 x the population of Iceland.

Here is where just a handful live today...


The problem is, how is the world going to find a resolution in Syria? I don't foresee anything in the near future, and regardless of our UNICEF donations, these camps are no place to raise a family.

[geek tragedy]

18. 1,000 times 10,000 is 10 million.

Some problems have no good solution.

[Glassunion]

20. You're 1000% correct.

Typo. I hate not having a numeric section on my keypad...

[Elmer S. E. Dump]

28. You were right the first time.

330,000 * 1000 = 330 million

[pampango]

19. International funding is at 23% of what the camps need. "Out of sight, out of mind."

The report showed that against the $4.53 billion required for programmes implemented by UN agencies and NGOs under the plan launched last December, only $1.06 billion – 23 per cent – had been received as of the end of May.

Already, this has meant that 1.6 million refugees have had their food assistance reduced this year; 750,000 children are not attending school; and life-saving health services are becoming too expensive for many, including 70,000 pregnant women at risk of unsafe deliveries.

Some 86 per cent of urban refugees in Jordan live below the poverty line of 3.2 dollars a day, while 45 per cent of refugees in Lebanon live in sub-standard shelters.

Almost half of all those affected by this crisis are children, many of whom struggle to cope with distress caused by the violence and upheaval they have experienced.

http://www.unhcr.org/558acbbc6.html

Conservatives don't like accepting refugees and they don't like spending money (foreign aid) on 'others'. Underfunded, squalid camps will continue to exist in poor neighboring countries, just waiting for the interminable Syrian war to end. But we can't let any of them come to rich Western countries because they are too different from us?

I'll side with the liberals in Iceland and Sweden and Germany on this one.

[geek tragedy]

23. they absolutely need to up the funding.

Iceland is a different story than Germany, because it's so small and literally insular. Once people are there, they're never going to leave.

[Fred Sanders]

22. Iceland will follow the Canadian model of multiculturalism, a country that has embraced them,

and not the failed melting pot model,of America.

[MADem]

29. No, they won't. They won't take the ten thousand. They'll maybe up it to two hundred.

And they'll watch 'em like hawks to make sure they don't get too comfortable.

Published April 15, 2015

A municipal representative for the Progressive Party believes Iceland’s Muslims are “rapists and perpetrators of violence”. When reached by the media to elaborate, he refused to comment.

Stundin reports that Rafn Einarsson, a representative for the Progressive Party on the Breiðholt neighbourhood council, has repeatedly expressed strongly anti-Muslim sentiments, publicly, going so far as to call for the deportation of all of Iceland’s approximately 1,500 Muslims.

Scrolling down Rafn’s Facebook page, the Grapevine took screenshots of a sample of his publicly-shared offerings, with underlined portions translated and direct links to the posts themselves:

?w=550&quality=85
“Those who come from Muslim countries are in every instance rapists and perpetrators of violence.”

....The Progressive Party of Reykjavík received considerable criticism last year for what many saw as decidedly anti-Muslim rhetoric, in particular from city councilperson Sveinbjörg Birna Sveinbjörnsdóttir. Sveinbjörg and other Progressives made repeated remarks during campaign season that depicted Muslims as a cause for societal concern.

http://grapevine.is/news/2015/04/15/progressive-wants-all-muslims-out-of-iceland/

[Fred Sanders]

30. Your position on the refugees is noted. Same old handful of haters always get all the the ink.

[MADem]

36. What is "my position on the refugees" Fred? Please, in plain language, I want you to tell me.

Speak plainly and clearly, now, Fred, and tell me EXACTLY what my position is.

You're clearly laboring under some dreadful mis-apprehension that, because I know how the Icelandic government views these things, that I am in possession of a particular POV about these people who are fleeing violence.

So please, Fred--ARTICULATE.

I'll wait for your reply.

[Fred Sanders]

38. I have a least an equal understanding of Icelanders and am proud and humbled that folks say they will take in as many refugees

as possible. I do not have LW Icelander videos to post.

Fred's position is clear. Your position is......?

"29. No, they won't. They won't take the ten thousand. They'll maybe up it to two hundred.

And they'll watch 'em like hawks to make sure they don't get too comfortable."

[MADem]

41. They can "say" whatever they might like--their government won't agree with them.

Stating that the government is unlikely to be swayed by ten thousand people griping (out of a grand total of 330,000) is not a "position." It's common sense. It's a description of what is happening in that country, if you'd only pay attention, Fred.

And to say that they'll watch 'em like hawks is again, common sense and not a "position" --because that's what they DO. They find reasons to send people back, to turn people away. They don't like MUSLIMS, especially. The "Progressive" (no shit) Party is actively lobbying against them. They don't like "too many" black, brown or Asian people. They are NOT welcoming to foreigners--except as tourists. They routinely violate international law when it comes to accommodating arriving refugees by incarcerating anyone with sketchy or incomplete documentation, and they do it without batting an eye.

If they accept Syrians, I can guarantee you that they will be "pre-screened" and the overwhelming majority of them will be Christians. If I were a Syrian, I'd stick to the camps. Fuck 'em.

You might want to have a peek at some of the links I have offered in this thread before you start getting all up in my grill about my "position." My position is that the Icelandic government has a nasty racist streak that kind of harshes the nice moonscape-y, isn't-this-cool-and-oh-so-different vibe they work so hard to push to the tourists. It ain't all that if you have "too much" melanin, if you're "too foreign looking," or if your religion is "too strange" to suit them. And ten thousand people out of a cohort of more than three hundred thousand isn't going to make a dent in that attitude.

It does make for a nice headline, though, making it seem like there's this massive groundswell--but let's get real--there are a ton of people who DIDN'T sign up for that, either, and if given the chance to vote on it, would vote the other way.

[pampango]

33. If they take the same percentage as Sweden has taken it would be about 7,500 based on the

respective populations of the two countries. We shall see.

[MADem]

37. There's a HUGE gap between fifty and seven grand. I don't see the government doing it.

I don't see them permitting people to sign on to volunteer their own resources, either. It's all happy and fun for two or three months, but this shit could drag on for YEARS.

They just won't issue the visas.

Iceland is a country that can tell you that you can't name your KID a particular name if it falls outside their "approved list." There's "liberal" and there's liberal. They are a rather controlled society in many respects.

[pampango]

42. You may well be right but I am glad there are liberals who are pushing them

to accept more refugees. If liberals don't push for this, we all know conservatives certainly won't.

Liberals don't always get what they want - for better or worse. This may be one of those times.

[MADem]

46. I think the answer is massive, massive, MASSIVE humanitarian aid at the camp level.

These people want to go HOME. They don't want to live in foreign countries on the margins.

We need refugee centers that offer housing, schools, medicine, shops, an opportunity to work while waiting for things to improve back home, and we need the rich countries to just get off their asses and start ponying up the dough to carve these centers out. Businesses should step up and find ways and reasons to put these people to work in light industry or what-have-you.

They shouldn't be tent city shitholes, either, they should be decent, even if prefab, housing, with a few parks with playing fields and shade and even a damn swimming pool or three. Real streets, not dirty, dusty crap paths. Mosques, churches, community centers. ART. Music. Stuff that makes people think life is worth living.

If they have to build an oasis in the desert they need to just DO IT. It's so much easier to keep people settled, in an environment where they can commiserate with understanding friends and neighbors, then shove them off into societies where they are resented and gawked at and, at the end of the day, forgotten. All of this flying people here and there and pushing them off on this country or that, if they took the money and focused it on improving their situation by carving out small communities in neighboring nations, they'd be better off. There are countries in the region that need to step up, and everyone around the world should toss money in the pot, too.

[pampango]

49. And if "massive, massive, MASSIVE humanitarian aid" does not happen, and it isn't, what do you tell

the people fleeing war and stuck in squalid refugee camps in Jordan, Lebanon and Turkey? "Just a few more months, a few more years at most, and the humanitarian aid we promised will flow in, the war will be over and you can go HOME. Just be patient."

Would you be patient living with your children in a "tent city shithole" waiting for rich countries to pay what they promised to pay? Actually the vast, vast, VAST majority of the 4 million Syrian refugees do exactly that. They are still in those "tent city shitholes" waiting for help and/or the war to end. Their patience and faith in the West is admirable, if a little mystifying. If I were there I doubt that I would be among the patient ones.

[MADem]

50. You don't take no for an answer.

This is a crisis on the lines of Katrina and the tsunami and a half dozen earthquakes rolled into one, and it needs a response that is robust and immediate. I think, frankly, a moral leader like the Pope could get a LOT of people off their asses and helping on this matter. The UN ain't cutting it.

Why are you asking me dumb-ass rhetorical questions? Who would be happy living in a "tent city shithole?" Why do you think I believe that they need to convert these camps to semi-permanent, possibly even permanent over time, communities, with full services, amenities, and Quality of Life inducements? And jobs? And light industry? And parks? And schools?

Do you think I said all that for shits-n-giggles?

Look, the camps are funded at less than a quarter of need. That is the issue that needs correcting. Stop asking stupid questions about what I might like when it is entirely obvious that I see the need and am aware of the conditions. Money can be spent trying to delocate people far from their communities and loved ones, or it can be spent improving their QOL in situ.

But playing the rhetorical question game doesn't cut it with me. That's just a pointless game of "Waaah--you need to feel BAD!!" and I'm not gonna play it.

You can discuss the issue, or you can have a nice day.

[Fred Sanders]

51. If I were a brown Muslim with a family in a tent city in Syria....fucking rights I would go to Iceland now!

Not even a close call. I would have zero problem with taking my chances with "the racists" of Iceland ....... than with the desert sun and ISIS.

Sticks and stones may break my brown bones, but racist rhetoric can not hurt me....like ISIS can.

Why do you think thousands of folks are risking their lives and their children's lives fleeing the hell on earth that are the refugee camps and they are far more living in their actual homes which are being bombed every day...oops, collateral damage?? Can you imagine?

Of course 99.9% have no problem going to anywhere else on the planet!

The point is not that Iceland folks are majority racists, that is your opinion, which I guess is what you are saying, but that a large minority, if your opinion is even true, clearly are not.

Those are the folks that need to be supported...RW extremists exist everywhere....their identical language is equally pathetic.

There has been a lot of pushback against the MP's rantings and the perception by some of a racist nation. Google it!

Rather than merely point out the racism, repetitively, how about condemning it instead and encouraging the folks mentioned in the OP?

[MADem]

56. No, you wouldn't, Fred. Because government policy would target you. They'd pick through your

paperwork, and upon learning of your religion, you'd be arrested for having "incomplete" and "inaccurate" documentation, in complete violation of international law, but never mind that--they don't care. Then you would be incarcerated, and deported inside of a month back to your place of embarkation under the Dublin rules. Your money would be gone, and you'd be back where you started.

You can ignore the links I'm providing in this thread all you'd like, but it won't change the situation. Ten thousand people who care in Iceland don't negate three hundred thousand who don't. Iceland is homogenous because they LIKE it that way. They vote for leaders who KEEP it that way.

It's a 'problem' with them. And 'condemning' it won't house Syrians. We need an answer to their plight NOW--not six months from now. I think the answer is closer to home for them--not some feel good/do good symbolic effort in the middle of the north Atlantic, far, far from their homeland, with a foreign language, an insular and unwelcoming culture, and inhospitable weather.

[pampango]

52. We agree that "it needs a response that is robust and immediate". That is Plan A.

However, if Plan A is massively underfunded and does not work after several years, many of the refugees and liberals in Western countries like Germany, Sweden and Iceland will push for a Plan B. It does little good to say, "No. No. Stick with Plan A a few more months or years. It will improve and be better for you."

Money can be spent trying to delocate people far from their communities and loved ones, or it can be spent improving their QOL in situ.

Agreed. However the same conservatives who don't want refugees coming to their countries, also do not want to spend money on 'foreign aid' to enable to refugees to survive 'in situ'. Republicans here and Conservatives in the UK are not going to aren't going to spend money on poor Arabs nor are they going to welcome them as refugees.

The Syrian War is in its 5th year. The refugee 'crisis' is just now hitting Europe and the world. The refugees have been patient. Many of them are already spending their own money to 'delocate' themselves, thus creating a Plan B. Many liberals are apparently willing to help them do this.

We should support your suggestion of "massive, massive, MASSIVE humanitarian aid" but how do we respond to those who are tired of waiting and pursue their own Plan B?

[MADem]

55. We need to strong-arm people, and we need major players in the world to step up and make

it happen. If the UN can't swing it, we need to find an agency that can. We need to, quite simply, DEMAND that Plan A.

If HRC weren't running, the Clinton Foundation could probably do a better job of running it, but anything they tried to do would be fraught with accusations of political opportunism. If Jimmy Carter weren't sick, he could probably make it happen with verve as well.

I think the best hope is the damn Pope. When he speaks, people listen--even atheists. He certainly could prime the pump, at any rate.

"We" as individuals, can't really "respond" to the Plan B team with much more than tea and sympathy. We can try putting pressure on governments, but good luck with that--they almost invariably take the long view. They know that a few clamoring do-gooders will eventually shut up, but those who don't want to see their taxes raised and their schools over-crowded and their streets crowded with "others" won't forgive if their national leadership gets down off the ramparts, as it were.

Perhaps those politicians should encourage those selfish types to dig deep now, so they don't have to dig deeper later, or something. The problem is money and stuff. We need to identify what 'stuff' is needed and find a way to get it to the camp environments quickly. We know how to get an Air Transportable Hospital to a site in a day and a half--a full service, sterile facility, able to operate around the clock--it's not like we haven't done this kind of thing before. It's really more a question of cash and WILL than anything else. We also need strong leadership at the world level, and maybe a more visible role for the King of Jordan--and the Queen as well (she could do a SEND MONEY tour). Queen (Step)Mother/Emeritus Noor - al - Hussein could be HUGELY helpful as well, if she had a mind. People in USA really like the former Lisa Hallaby, all American girl, and she could probably raise a bundle in North America and Europe. Artists need to start donating portions of their proceeds to the cause, they need to do telethons, raise money all over hell, GOFUNDME on a world scale.

It's time for HUMANS to step up and put their faces to this issue. A picture of a drowned child evokes horror and empathy, but we need to take it ten steps beyond that and get people to open wallets. People should not have to be running and putting themselves in harm's way to try and survive. They should have a place of safety where they can wait this out in dignity and productivity, with people around them who share their culture and their concerns.

[MADem]

45. Where are you getting this stuff? Iceland sends people back if they don't have the right

paperwork. They arrest people on arrival. They're HORRIBLE to refugees. They look for reasons to reject them. They "Dublin" them out of there at every opportunity.

Good grief, I don't know where you're getting this stuff. They aren't very welcoming at all.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

4. As I just noted in another diary, the population of the US is 1000 times that of Iceland.

If we were taking in as many refugees per capita as Iceland, We'd be taking in 50000. According to google, we've taken in fewer than a thousand in the last three years...

[erronis]

12. Yeah - even when we were murdering civilians in Iraq we didn't admit many refugees from our war.

It probably had to do with not making the outcome of our little "excursion" too visible. Sort of like hiding the caskets at Dover AFB. What scum!

[LeftinOH]

15. As to Iceland being isolated - it totally is, because

of its geographical situation. Moving from one country to another within Europe (even the UK or Ireland) is fairly easy - maybe even for refugees who can sneak in unnoticed. With Iceland, either you're there - or you're nowhere near there. And if someone is stuck there due to financial limitations or having declared refugee status - they're going to be there a while.

If they accept refugees, they should just go ahead and relinquish a neighborhood or two in Reykjavik to semi-permanent refugee settlement.

[MADem]

25. That sounds disturbingly like a ghetto...I don't think that's an answer, really. nt

[bvar22]

34. Can you imagine the Culture and Environmental Shock...

...of moving from Syria to Iceland?

[Glassunion]

35. It's better than remaining where they are.

It would not be easy, not by any stretch, but the alternative I think would outweigh it in my mind.

[Fred Sanders]

57. Did you forget the sarcasm emoticon? That is what immigrants have been going through and doing for....forever!??

[bvar22]

58. NO. I believe you are incorrect insisting

that Desert People have been relocated overnight to ICELAND for......forever.

[Fred Sanders]

59. They are not "desert people", they are People perfectly prepared and able to adapt...but I see

you are one of those that think otherwise. Iceland, full of "ice people", is no worse than Fargo for weather, plus they all have these things called "buildings" and "central heating and cooling" and everywhere there is a thing called "seasons"...I still say you must have forgot the sarcasm emoticon.

[bvar22]

60. I drove to Fargo, and then up to Portal in late January one year.

Prior to that time, I had spent all my life in The South.
Believe me when I tell you I experienced Culture Shock.
I know people who have suffered Culture Shock from just watching the movie Fargo.

I am fascinated that someone could actually believe there wouldn't be any shock at such an extreme change
in environment.

[likesmountains 52]

47. Anyone know how to go about offering this in the US?

[niyad]

48. restores my faith in humanity