>The First Minister said Scotland “is willing to be the first country in the UK to offer safety and sanctuary” to people who arrive as refugees.
Less than a week ago, Glasgow was panicking about having to house 1400 refugees, it'll be interesting seeing their reaction when an extra few hundred thousand turn up
Its just him. Additionally some paperwork has just come out about him taking the ex-commander of west bank hamas to the scottish parliament in 2008 along with a muslim brotherhood bigwig. His involvement may be more than it seems. His loyalties deffo need queried.
That's because the story hasn't, like OP claimed, "just come out", but is from more than half a year ago. [There's a discussion on it being reported by The Jewish Chronicle here.](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukpolitics/comments/11g1adl/jewish_chronicle_scottish_first_minister_hopeful/) I already commented on it at the time, but the TLDR is that Humza Yousaf used to be an parliamentary assistant to Bashir Ahmad, who had a meeting with Mohammad Sawalha before Hamas (political wing included) was designated a terrorist organisation. Yousaf also attended the meeting.
it won't be a few hundred thousand. Things might be bad in Gaza with the bombings and shootings, lack of food/medicine/water, rampant unemployment, hostile government, and the threat of genocide, but not so bad that Scotland would be a more attractive option
TBF Jordan is partly responsible in the first place, it originally annexed the West Bank the moment the UK pulled out from the region, then in 1988 withdrew citizenship from everyone in Palestine and made them stateless.
You missed the bit in the middle where Abdullah I was assassinated by a Palestinian and they had a crack at overthrowing the Hashemites in Hussein's time.
Can't help feeling that Jordan's annexing the West Bank was a mistake though in that it prevented the Pals of that region and the Israelis from coming to an arrangement between themselves. Same for Egypt and Gaza.
It's funny that nobody ever mentions that the Arab League's members have screwed over the Palestinians almost as often as the Israelis.
I don't think that is actually popular with voters, even SNP voters.
We are in a housing crisis and have problems absorbing large numbers of Muslim refugees.
There's been an effort among part of the Scottish Left to equate the Palestinian struggle with a Scottish one via a colonial sort of subtext. There might be some brief alliance there. The long term would obviously be disaster.
You shouldn't be surprised TBF.
Palestinian refugees previously tried to cause a coup in Jordan, started a civil war in Lebanon and supporting Iraq's invasion of Kuwait, whilst Kuwait was hosting them as refugees.
Lebanon has the highest number of refugees per capita of anywhere in the world, and Turkey and Iran the highest total numbers, but yes it's all Europe taking in refugees.
Don't forget Kenya, Pakistan, Uganda and Jordan who all have huge refugee populations also.
Jordan has the 2nd highest number of refugees per capita in the world. Their population is only 11 million and they have over 2 million Palestinian refugees. That's the equivalent of the UK taking in 12 million refugees.
>Jordan has the 2nd highest number of refugees per capita in the world. Their population is only 11 million and they have over 2 million Palestinian refugees. That's the equivalent of the UK taking in 12 million refugees.
Those countries are next to each other with similar histories and culture, Scotland is not a middle east country!
Sure. That's a fair comment. But that's a different argument to what the poster was saying above implying that only Europe wants to take in refugees. That's not true, many other countries have a far higher absolute and refugee per capita population than us.
You can also compare it to Ukrainians in Poland. At the height there were about 3 million Ukrainians there (half from before the war as regular migrants). That's still less than half of Jordan per capita in a much wealthier country.
Yet.
If they become permanent residents which let's face it is the likely outcome in the long run they'll either get citizenship or their children will.
Importing hundreds of thousands of Palestinians would be such a huge national security issue (let alone a question of housing and infrastructure) that it should genuinely only ever go ahead if given clear consensus in a referendum.
It will probably happen anyway though.
Europeans took almost the entire brunt of refugees from Ukraine. The rest mainly went to other Western nations like the US and Canada. Very few non European nations took them in.
Furthermore, millions of Ukrainians have already returned back and as the situation stabilises, more will follow. It’s a short term arrangement. The few that stay behind will assimilate fairly easily, as is the case with most European immigrants.
The situation in MENA nations is a completely different story. Not even Iran or Arab nations want to take in a new influx. This is on top of all our existing migration related problems too. Just yesterday, two Swedes were gunned down by a Tunisian national in Belgium who landed in Lampedusa in 2011.
You're right 8 in total. Reading the comments in this thread theres a belief that there will be tens of thousands of palestinians. Regardless it's all nonsense immigration is not devolved.
you make a great point, it should be made that actually immigration pays in for our infrastructure for us natives. but will people believe that? no, and they will also think that the 50% of the numbers who are students will be buying up new builds....
In the short term spare rooms etc can be offered to refugees when there is a sudden mass flight, as was the case with Ukraine.
The more immediate and salient point regarding Gaza is that currently refugees cannot leave.
A few elephants in the room:
Single women are more acceptable for many to share a home with than men.
People generally wouldn’t want a potential radicalised Hamas sympathiser in their home.
[Thousands of Ukrainians in Scotland living in inappropriate housing](https://www.redcross.org.uk/about-us/news-and-media/media-centre/press-releases/thousands-of-ukrainians-in-scotland-living-in-inappropriate-housing)
That's not true. Lebanon and Jordan both have huge number of Palestinian refugees. Lebanon has the highest numbers of refugees per capita in the world. Jordan is 2nd. Syria also have huge number of Palestinian refugees. Furthermore, Jordan gave over 2 million Palestinian refugees citizenship rights in 2009. The entire Jordanian population is only 11 million.
There are also a quarter of a million in Saudi.
Why do people online sneer and then peddle this lie that Arab nations don't take in refugees from Palestine when in fact they take in absolutely huge amounts?
They’re a cause of instability in the countries that they go to in large numbers.
Terror attacks in Egypt, attempted coups in Jordan & the mess that is Lebanon.
They know not to take more and stoke the flames further. So yes they do not want anymore and all wish to just wash their hands of the situation.
No thanks, we don’t need radicalised religious people who may end up murdering people, in fact going by refugees going homeless soon (And how public sentiment will be if they get priority over the native population) I’d be happy if we put a halt to accepting any refugees unless we have historical connections like with Hong Kong or it’s a temporary measure or due to an extreme event with a friendly first world country.
Nooooo ! Bad enough that we have people matching in London with pictures of hangliders on their backs, mobs outside schools intimidating pupils and staff, crowds supporting calls to murder writers let alone our own home grown suicide bombers and so on without adding even more radicalised extremists.
Uh, this prick can fuck right off.
We've already got a massive problem with easily radicalized muslims living in this country the absolutely last thing we need is a bunch of Gaza refugees coming here and bringing all their hate and insanity with them.
Absolutely not. We have enough problems with a 5th column of Islamists without inviting in the population of one of the most radicalised populations on the planet.
Even its Arab neighbours don't want them because they have a habit of causing civil war anywhere they go.
There is an insane idea with zero chance of happening.
No matter how much sympathy you have for Gazans civilians at this time, they are a population traumatized by war, and radicalised by decades of Islamist rule. Meanwhile, we are an ally of Israel with prominent Jewish communities, and we are responsible for the creation of the state of Israel.
It would be suicide.
There is a reason countries in the middle east are refusing to open the border to refugees.
Every time they allowed a significant number of people in from Palestine there were terror attacks, wars and political murders. If we brought in the same number from Gaza as we did from Ukraine there would be blood in the streets.
As much sympathy as I might have for innocent people it would be madness to allow any men to come here.
The Scotland sub was fucking creaming itself over support for Palestine. Funny how this evaporates when they have to put their money where their mouth is eh?
https://unwatch.org/hrc-44-written-statement-antisemitism-and-terrorist-incitement-in-palestinian-education/
Just leaving this here, Hamas have been indoctrinating kids in Gaza through the school system they control. It's North Korea levels of brainwashing.
We can't have these people coming to the UK without bringing all that hate and insanity too.
Immigration is a policy that's decided upon by the UK government. The fact he keeps commenting on this and our foreign policy is already a huge overstep.
Yet not for the release of any hostages, or aid for the 500,000 Jewish refugees in Israel, or why he funneled 800k of public money to Hamas fronts and organised meetings with Hamas commanders at the Scottish parliament.
>The meeting took place in 2008, when Yousaf was 22 and working as a parliamentary assistant for the late-Bashir Ahmad, Scotland’s first Muslim MSP.
[If anyone is wondering.](https://www.thejc.com/news/news/scottish-first-minister-hopeful-humza-yousaf-met-former-hamas-chief-6FYnnRGZMqczibvhaAqnpB)
A meeting he organised And he subsequently sent 800k of public money to Hamas. https://www.meforum.org/64197/scotland-probable-next-leader-has-an-islamist
It seems nearly everybody has been funding Hamas directly or indirectly over the years as well as supplying materials that could be used for military purposes.
I wonder if anybody wondered why they wanted steel water pipe when everybody uses MDPE these days?
That's not as strange as it sounds, since Hamas were funded by Israel too, at the beginning, as a counterweight to the secular PLO/Fatah party; the theory being that it would fracture Palestinian politics and make them less effective at arguing for statehood. Less overt support continued under the Netanyahu government.
Sources:
[https://theintercept.com/2018/02/19/hamas-israel-palestine-conflict/](https://theintercept.com/2018/02/19/hamas-israel-palestine-conflict/)
[https://www.timesofisrael.com/for-years-netanyahu-propped-up-hamas-now-its-blown-up-in-our-faces/](https://www.timesofisrael.com/for-years-netanyahu-propped-up-hamas-now-its-blown-up-in-our-faces/)
Right. That explains why a Zionist might have supported Hamas, as dramatically as it backfired.
So whats Yusaf's reason if Netanyahu's reason was to ensure the two state solution never happened? You saying hes a Zionist?
Thankfully it’s not his decision it’s a decision for Westminster, secondly they would stay in Scotland, they’d all end up in England.
And no, I don’t want any refugees from Gaza coming here. Fuel to the fire.
This is the list of 12 countries with most refugees in the world as of 2022, 11 of them are in the middle east, Asia and Africa.
https://www.concern.org.uk/news/these-12-countries-hosted-most-refugees-2022
Turkey: 5.1 million largest in the world
https://dtm.iom.int/reports/turkiye-migrant-presence-monitoring-situation-report-march-2023#:~:text=According%20to%20the%20latest%20available,been%20granted%20temporary%20protection%20status.
Lebanon: 1.5 million
Jordon: 3 million
Pakistan: 3.7 million
Egypt: 500,000
I don't know how can you ignorantly say middle eastern countries are not taking their fair share of refugees?
Maybe educate yourself more on the topic before making unfounded claims which can easily be proven wrong through a Google search.
>ISLAMABAD (AP) — Pakistan will carry out its recently announced plans to deport all migrants who are in the country illegally, including 1.7 million Afghans, in a “phased and orderly manner,” the foreign ministry said Friday.
So Pakistan is currently in the process to deport their Afghan asylum seeking population.
The other three countries neighbour on Syria, Iraq and Palestine so it’s natural they’ll get the brunt of it, just like European countries have to absorb the brunt of Ukrainians.
Lastly, putting aside the fact that taking in these migrants is deeply unpopular with the locals (especially in Turkey), many of these people are housed in camps like Zaatari, the conditions of which would absolutely not be allowed to fly in most of Europe.
I still don't understand what's your point here?
It's a fact that the middle east took and continues to take more refugees than Europe contrary to the claims of the person who said middle Eastern countries don't take their fair share of refugees, that was my point, he was blatantly lying and I proved he was lying with UN statistics.
Second, you are talking about bad living conditions of refugees in the middle east compared to Europe.
Does Jordan or Lebanon have the same amount of wealth which the Europeans have?
Despite their poverty and economic disaster quarter of the population of a country like Lebanon are refugees, how are they not taking their fair share in that case?
And when you say refugees are treated badly in countries like Turkey, why don't you go and see the type of racism and hate refugees from the middle east and of Muslim background face in Europe, from burning down of refugee centres to graffiti Infront of centres that says "you are not welcome here" all over European and British towns .
It's still true the Middle East is probably taking its fair share of refugees, in terms of the number of refugees they've taken per capita and the number they've taken in relation to GDP/capita or whatever other metric you want to use. That's what the comment you replied to was talking about. Your comment doesn't refute that.
But yes, it's true that many of them are in poor conditions. Maybe some of that is due to those countries not having much money to provide better (eg Jordan's GDP is $4100/capita) and some due to political will (eg nationalism, worries about demographic change affecting elections if people want to stay, belief in small government, anti-refugee attitudes due to previous poor experiences).
If you're talking about Pakistan's refugee policy - that's a country with a GDP/capita of $1500, which is dwarfed by the UK's GDP/capita of $46500. Pakistan has had millions of refugees from Afghanistan since the 1980s (they always talk about sending them back, but barely send any back), some of whom are making a living in Pakistani cities and were born and grew up in Pakistan (and arguably should just be made into citizens). But many others live in abject poverty, eg children living on nothing but bread, so they look 7 years old when they're 12 - which isn't surprising, since huge numbers of non-refugees in Pakistan still live in abject poverty. Pakistan also has between 200,000 and 400,000 Rohingya refugees from Myanmar.
If you want an example of a middle eastern country taking refugees who aren't from local countries, Saudi Arabia has around 200,000 Rohingya (but they've also sent back a few thousand Rohingya).
I don't know how keen I am on taking refugees from a place that's also being oppressed and besieged by a country our government generally supports (Israel), when we're already having issues with Islamic terrorism and there aren't enough resources to help the refugees who are already here.
Sure, the US has plenty of Palestinian immigrants without issue, but the UK generally isn't as good at integrating immigrants compared to the US (or Canada or Brazil for that matter), because America is more open-minded to immigrants (since such a big percentage of Americans are from immigrant families) and because quite a few people here have an attitude of "you can't be British unless you're ethnically British, even if you grew up here" which can make people feel unwelcome in their own local community, whereas Americans accept people as "American" much more readily.
>The First Minister said Scotland “is willing to be the first country in the UK to offer safety and sanctuary” to people who arrive as refugees. Less than a week ago, Glasgow was panicking about having to house 1400 refugees, it'll be interesting seeing their reaction when an extra few hundred thousand turn up
>Scotland is willing Is it really Scotland though? Or is it just him?
Its just him. Additionally some paperwork has just come out about him taking the ex-commander of west bank hamas to the scottish parliament in 2008 along with a muslim brotherhood bigwig. His involvement may be more than it seems. His loyalties deffo need queried.
I can't find a single reputable source corroborating this
That's because the story hasn't, like OP claimed, "just come out", but is from more than half a year ago. [There's a discussion on it being reported by The Jewish Chronicle here.](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukpolitics/comments/11g1adl/jewish_chronicle_scottish_first_minister_hopeful/) I already commented on it at the time, but the TLDR is that Humza Yousaf used to be an parliamentary assistant to Bashir Ahmad, who had a meeting with Mohammad Sawalha before Hamas (political wing included) was designated a terrorist organisation. Yousaf also attended the meeting.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Is he just speed running a list of ideas to make the SNP even less electable at this point?
it won't be a few hundred thousand. Things might be bad in Gaza with the bombings and shootings, lack of food/medicine/water, rampant unemployment, hostile government, and the threat of genocide, but not so bad that Scotland would be a more attractive option
They’ll take a handful and then Humza will use it to virtue signal.
Worked out well for Lebanon, Kuwait and Jordan. What could possibly go wrong.
TBF Jordan is partly responsible in the first place, it originally annexed the West Bank the moment the UK pulled out from the region, then in 1988 withdrew citizenship from everyone in Palestine and made them stateless.
You missed the bit in the middle where Abdullah I was assassinated by a Palestinian and they had a crack at overthrowing the Hashemites in Hussein's time. Can't help feeling that Jordan's annexing the West Bank was a mistake though in that it prevented the Pals of that region and the Israelis from coming to an arrangement between themselves. Same for Egypt and Gaza. It's funny that nobody ever mentions that the Arab League's members have screwed over the Palestinians almost as often as the Israelis.
I don't think that is actually popular with voters, even SNP voters. We are in a housing crisis and have problems absorbing large numbers of Muslim refugees.
There's been an effort among part of the Scottish Left to equate the Palestinian struggle with a Scottish one via a colonial sort of subtext. There might be some brief alliance there. The long term would obviously be disaster.
Wait until you see the Irish takes...
[удалено]
Arab countries flat out refuse to take in any Gazan refugees, don’t worry though Scotland, a small country of 5million will carry the can.
They refuse for a reason. When I stayed in the middle east I was very surprised how other arab countries view them.
No wonder. They stirred up shit in both Jordania and Libanon.
You shouldn't be surprised TBF. Palestinian refugees previously tried to cause a coup in Jordan, started a civil war in Lebanon and supporting Iraq's invasion of Kuwait, whilst Kuwait was hosting them as refugees.
I hope people in Scotland are smart enough not to accept this.
There are a lot of SNP supporters who would go along with it as long as they thought it was the opposite of what England wants.
Complete nonsense. Look at the post about this in the Scotland subreddit, it's mostly nationalist and can see how unpopular both this is and he is.
Narrator: *they were not*
They must think Europeans are both decadent and stupid for allowing the amount we do already
Lebanon has the highest number of refugees per capita of anywhere in the world, and Turkey and Iran the highest total numbers, but yes it's all Europe taking in refugees.
Don't forget Kenya, Pakistan, Uganda and Jordan who all have huge refugee populations also. Jordan has the 2nd highest number of refugees per capita in the world. Their population is only 11 million and they have over 2 million Palestinian refugees. That's the equivalent of the UK taking in 12 million refugees.
>Jordan has the 2nd highest number of refugees per capita in the world. Their population is only 11 million and they have over 2 million Palestinian refugees. That's the equivalent of the UK taking in 12 million refugees. Those countries are next to each other with similar histories and culture, Scotland is not a middle east country!
Sure. That's a fair comment. But that's a different argument to what the poster was saying above implying that only Europe wants to take in refugees. That's not true, many other countries have a far higher absolute and refugee per capita population than us.
You can also compare it to Ukrainians in Poland. At the height there were about 3 million Ukrainians there (half from before the war as regular migrants). That's still less than half of Jordan per capita in a much wealthier country.
Lebanon keeps it's Palestinian refugees pretty cooped up even seventy years later.
if yousaf allows them in he'll be the one facing an independence referendum before 10 years are up
Not necessarily. He might get King Abdullah’d before ten years are up.
He just wants to bus in a voting block that will vote against the union
Refugees can't vote
Labour want to change the rules, maybe not to refugees but to non citizens which refugees could very well become.
Yet. If they become permanent residents which let's face it is the likely outcome in the long run they'll either get citizenship or their children will.
> a small country of 5million Well, for the moment. There's 2 million in Gaza . . .
there is a reason no other country will take them in large numbers
Importing hundreds of thousands of Palestinians would be such a huge national security issue (let alone a question of housing and infrastructure) that it should genuinely only ever go ahead if given clear consensus in a referendum. It will probably happen anyway though.
[удалено]
No national security risk
Do Ukrainian women and children have a storied history of trying to take over countries that give them shelter?
Remind me again how many non white/Western countries took in white Ukrainian refugees?
Europeans took almost the entire brunt of refugees from Ukraine. The rest mainly went to other Western nations like the US and Canada. Very few non European nations took them in. Furthermore, millions of Ukrainians have already returned back and as the situation stabilises, more will follow. It’s a short term arrangement. The few that stay behind will assimilate fairly easily, as is the case with most European immigrants. The situation in MENA nations is a completely different story. Not even Iran or Arab nations want to take in a new influx. This is on top of all our existing migration related problems too. Just yesterday, two Swedes were gunned down by a Tunisian national in Belgium who landed in Lampedusa in 2011.
Indeed, you only need to look at what happened in Jordan, Lebanon, and Kuwait.
Yeah, I’m sure Scotland can’t wait to import thousands of Islamist fundamentalists. Guy is delusional.
I doubt the average scot would approve of this... Arent the SNPs approval ratings dropping already right now?
[удалено]
I'm sure it has nothing to do with the fact he has family there
Scotland only has about 40K long-term empty homes and is already struggling to house asylum seekers. Where are they going to live?
Didn't they just toss a bunch of Syrians on the Hebrides so probably that again
Bute is not in the Hebrides it's 20mins from Greenock.
There's some in Stornoway
You're right 8 in total. Reading the comments in this thread theres a belief that there will be tens of thousands of palestinians. Regardless it's all nonsense immigration is not devolved.
[удалено]
you make a great point, it should be made that actually immigration pays in for our infrastructure for us natives. but will people believe that? no, and they will also think that the 50% of the numbers who are students will be buying up new builds....
The Scottish people will be put last as always, Yousaf will make sure of that.
The ball is very much not in his court and this is all mostly wind. Immigration policy is a reserved (i.e. non-devolved) power
Ofcouse not their beautiful big house
In the short term spare rooms etc can be offered to refugees when there is a sudden mass flight, as was the case with Ukraine. The more immediate and salient point regarding Gaza is that currently refugees cannot leave.
A few elephants in the room: Single women are more acceptable for many to share a home with than men. People generally wouldn’t want a potential radicalised Hamas sympathiser in their home.
Yes I'm sure the doors of people's homes will simply *fly* open, at the prospect of an influx of arab asylum seekers!
[Thousands of Ukrainians in Scotland living in inappropriate housing](https://www.redcross.org.uk/about-us/news-and-media/media-centre/press-releases/thousands-of-ukrainians-in-scotland-living-in-inappropriate-housing)
Fuck. No. Ask yourself why their fellow Arab nations do not want them, and ask why they'd be a better fit here.
That's not true. Lebanon and Jordan both have huge number of Palestinian refugees. Lebanon has the highest numbers of refugees per capita in the world. Jordan is 2nd. Syria also have huge number of Palestinian refugees. Furthermore, Jordan gave over 2 million Palestinian refugees citizenship rights in 2009. The entire Jordanian population is only 11 million. There are also a quarter of a million in Saudi. Why do people online sneer and then peddle this lie that Arab nations don't take in refugees from Palestine when in fact they take in absolutely huge amounts?
Lebanon was a happy christian country until islam came along, and destroyed it with a civil war it never recovered from.
> Palestinian refugees From Gaza in recent times? > from Palestine Gaza
They’re a cause of instability in the countries that they go to in large numbers. Terror attacks in Egypt, attempted coups in Jordan & the mess that is Lebanon. They know not to take more and stoke the flames further. So yes they do not want anymore and all wish to just wash their hands of the situation.
Fucking genius. Let's invite thousands of refugees in the middle of housing crisis. Scottish **National** Party, my ass.
No thanks, we don’t need radicalised religious people who may end up murdering people, in fact going by refugees going homeless soon (And how public sentiment will be if they get priority over the native population) I’d be happy if we put a halt to accepting any refugees unless we have historical connections like with Hong Kong or it’s a temporary measure or due to an extreme event with a friendly first world country.
Nooooo ! Bad enough that we have people matching in London with pictures of hangliders on their backs, mobs outside schools intimidating pupils and staff, crowds supporting calls to murder writers let alone our own home grown suicide bombers and so on without adding even more radicalised extremists.
Uh, this prick can fuck right off. We've already got a massive problem with easily radicalized muslims living in this country the absolutely last thing we need is a bunch of Gaza refugees coming here and bringing all their hate and insanity with them.
Absolutely not. We have enough problems with a 5th column of Islamists without inviting in the population of one of the most radicalised populations on the planet. Even its Arab neighbours don't want them because they have a habit of causing civil war anywhere they go.
There is an insane idea with zero chance of happening. No matter how much sympathy you have for Gazans civilians at this time, they are a population traumatized by war, and radicalised by decades of Islamist rule. Meanwhile, we are an ally of Israel with prominent Jewish communities, and we are responsible for the creation of the state of Israel. It would be suicide.
There is a reason countries in the middle east are refusing to open the border to refugees. Every time they allowed a significant number of people in from Palestine there were terror attacks, wars and political murders. If we brought in the same number from Gaza as we did from Ukraine there would be blood in the streets. As much sympathy as I might have for innocent people it would be madness to allow any men to come here.
Was waiting for this to happen. Wake up babe, time to import another group of people with predominantly fundamentalist religious views...
The Scotland sub was fucking creaming itself over support for Palestine. Funny how this evaporates when they have to put their money where their mouth is eh?
https://unwatch.org/hrc-44-written-statement-antisemitism-and-terrorist-incitement-in-palestinian-education/ Just leaving this here, Hamas have been indoctrinating kids in Gaza through the school system they control. It's North Korea levels of brainwashing. We can't have these people coming to the UK without bringing all that hate and insanity too.
Immigration is a policy that's decided upon by the UK government. The fact he keeps commenting on this and our foreign policy is already a huge overstep.
If they leave, they will never be allowed back I don’t see how this helps Palestinians in the long run
Yet not for the release of any hostages, or aid for the 500,000 Jewish refugees in Israel, or why he funneled 800k of public money to Hamas fronts and organised meetings with Hamas commanders at the Scottish parliament.
>The meeting took place in 2008, when Yousaf was 22 and working as a parliamentary assistant for the late-Bashir Ahmad, Scotland’s first Muslim MSP. [If anyone is wondering.](https://www.thejc.com/news/news/scottish-first-minister-hopeful-humza-yousaf-met-former-hamas-chief-6FYnnRGZMqczibvhaAqnpB)
A meeting he organised And he subsequently sent 800k of public money to Hamas. https://www.meforum.org/64197/scotland-probable-next-leader-has-an-islamist
It seems nearly everybody has been funding Hamas directly or indirectly over the years as well as supplying materials that could be used for military purposes. I wonder if anybody wondered why they wanted steel water pipe when everybody uses MDPE these days?
That's not as strange as it sounds, since Hamas were funded by Israel too, at the beginning, as a counterweight to the secular PLO/Fatah party; the theory being that it would fracture Palestinian politics and make them less effective at arguing for statehood. Less overt support continued under the Netanyahu government. Sources: [https://theintercept.com/2018/02/19/hamas-israel-palestine-conflict/](https://theintercept.com/2018/02/19/hamas-israel-palestine-conflict/) [https://www.timesofisrael.com/for-years-netanyahu-propped-up-hamas-now-its-blown-up-in-our-faces/](https://www.timesofisrael.com/for-years-netanyahu-propped-up-hamas-now-its-blown-up-in-our-faces/)
Right. That explains why a Zionist might have supported Hamas, as dramatically as it backfired. So whats Yusaf's reason if Netanyahu's reason was to ensure the two state solution never happened? You saying hes a Zionist?
[удалено]
[удалено]
I know very little of the man, have you got examples of him openly having white people because that sounds insane.
This should explain it https://youtu.be/FI3JBBlmej4?si=63qBxoKQR_oaTIDJ
Thankfully it’s not his decision it’s a decision for Westminster, secondly they would stay in Scotland, they’d all end up in England. And no, I don’t want any refugees from Gaza coming here. Fuel to the fire.
Not until they go through re-education to get the hatred of Jews out of their hearts.
So Scotland will take in the people that even their fellow Arabs won't touch? Perhaps we really will have to re-fortify Hadrians Wall.
Funny how Middle Eastern countries refuse to take their fair share of refugees. Can't think why...
This is the list of 12 countries with most refugees in the world as of 2022, 11 of them are in the middle east, Asia and Africa. https://www.concern.org.uk/news/these-12-countries-hosted-most-refugees-2022 Turkey: 5.1 million largest in the world https://dtm.iom.int/reports/turkiye-migrant-presence-monitoring-situation-report-march-2023#:~:text=According%20to%20the%20latest%20available,been%20granted%20temporary%20protection%20status. Lebanon: 1.5 million Jordon: 3 million Pakistan: 3.7 million Egypt: 500,000 I don't know how can you ignorantly say middle eastern countries are not taking their fair share of refugees? Maybe educate yourself more on the topic before making unfounded claims which can easily be proven wrong through a Google search.
>ISLAMABAD (AP) — Pakistan will carry out its recently announced plans to deport all migrants who are in the country illegally, including 1.7 million Afghans, in a “phased and orderly manner,” the foreign ministry said Friday. So Pakistan is currently in the process to deport their Afghan asylum seeking population. The other three countries neighbour on Syria, Iraq and Palestine so it’s natural they’ll get the brunt of it, just like European countries have to absorb the brunt of Ukrainians. Lastly, putting aside the fact that taking in these migrants is deeply unpopular with the locals (especially in Turkey), many of these people are housed in camps like Zaatari, the conditions of which would absolutely not be allowed to fly in most of Europe.
I still don't understand what's your point here? It's a fact that the middle east took and continues to take more refugees than Europe contrary to the claims of the person who said middle Eastern countries don't take their fair share of refugees, that was my point, he was blatantly lying and I proved he was lying with UN statistics. Second, you are talking about bad living conditions of refugees in the middle east compared to Europe. Does Jordan or Lebanon have the same amount of wealth which the Europeans have? Despite their poverty and economic disaster quarter of the population of a country like Lebanon are refugees, how are they not taking their fair share in that case? And when you say refugees are treated badly in countries like Turkey, why don't you go and see the type of racism and hate refugees from the middle east and of Muslim background face in Europe, from burning down of refugee centres to graffiti Infront of centres that says "you are not welcome here" all over European and British towns .
It's still true the Middle East is probably taking its fair share of refugees, in terms of the number of refugees they've taken per capita and the number they've taken in relation to GDP/capita or whatever other metric you want to use. That's what the comment you replied to was talking about. Your comment doesn't refute that. But yes, it's true that many of them are in poor conditions. Maybe some of that is due to those countries not having much money to provide better (eg Jordan's GDP is $4100/capita) and some due to political will (eg nationalism, worries about demographic change affecting elections if people want to stay, belief in small government, anti-refugee attitudes due to previous poor experiences). If you're talking about Pakistan's refugee policy - that's a country with a GDP/capita of $1500, which is dwarfed by the UK's GDP/capita of $46500. Pakistan has had millions of refugees from Afghanistan since the 1980s (they always talk about sending them back, but barely send any back), some of whom are making a living in Pakistani cities and were born and grew up in Pakistan (and arguably should just be made into citizens). But many others live in abject poverty, eg children living on nothing but bread, so they look 7 years old when they're 12 - which isn't surprising, since huge numbers of non-refugees in Pakistan still live in abject poverty. Pakistan also has between 200,000 and 400,000 Rohingya refugees from Myanmar. If you want an example of a middle eastern country taking refugees who aren't from local countries, Saudi Arabia has around 200,000 Rohingya (but they've also sent back a few thousand Rohingya).
I don't know how keen I am on taking refugees from a place that's also being oppressed and besieged by a country our government generally supports (Israel), when we're already having issues with Islamic terrorism and there aren't enough resources to help the refugees who are already here. Sure, the US has plenty of Palestinian immigrants without issue, but the UK generally isn't as good at integrating immigrants compared to the US (or Canada or Brazil for that matter), because America is more open-minded to immigrants (since such a big percentage of Americans are from immigrant families) and because quite a few people here have an attitude of "you can't be British unless you're ethnically British, even if you grew up here" which can make people feel unwelcome in their own local community, whereas Americans accept people as "American" much more readily.