Merkel slams new fascist movement in New Year's address

[Thanas]

Guardian

Angela Merkel issues New Year’s warning over rightwing Pegida group
German chancellor claims leaders of movement, referred to as ‘pinstripe Nazis’, are rooted in prejudice, coldness, and hatred

German chancellor Angela Merkel in a New Year’s address deplored the rise of a rightwing populist movement, saying its leaders have “prejudice, coldness, even hatred in their hearts”.

In her strongest comments yet on the so-called Patriotic Europeans Against the Islamisation of the West (Pegida), she spoke of demonstrators shouting “we are the people”, co-opting a slogan from the rallies that led up to the fall of the Berlin Wall 25 years ago.

“But what they really mean is: you are not one of us, because of your skin colour or your religion,” Merkel said, according to a pre-released copy of a televised speech she was to due to deliver to the nation on Wednesday evening.

“So I say to all those who go to such demonstrations: do not follow those who have called the rallies. Because all too often they have prejudice, coldness, even hatred in their hearts.”

The nationalistic and xenophobic Pegida movement, only formed in late October, has since drawn more than 17,000 protesters on to the streets of the eastern city of Dresden, sparking heated debate and deep soul-searching in the country.

Merkel in her wide-ranging speech touched on crises such as west Africa’s Ebola outbreak and the conflicts in Ukraine and Iraq and Syria, where the Islamic State group “brutally murders all those people who refuse to submit to its rule”.

“One consequence of these wars and crises is that worldwide there are more refugees than we have seen since the second world war. Many literally escaped death,” she said.

“It goes without saying that we help them and take in people who seek refuge with us,” she said, pointing to the estimated 200,000-odd asylum seekers who have come this year to Europe’s biggest economy to ask for a safe haven.

The chancellor mentioned demographics, the rapid ageing of the German population, as one of the key national challenges and called immigration “a gain for all of us”.

Touching on the case of a Kurdish refugee who has settled in Germany, she said that it is “perhaps the biggest compliment” for the country to call it a place “where the children of the persecuted can grow up without fear”.

This really was a great address overall, I'll post the transcript when it is released.

It is very refreshening to finally see Merkel speak out on this issue - these bastards have been online for over a month now.

[K. A. Pital]

I never thought they are anything different than all the other neo-fascist and neo-nazi morons across Europe and their neo-fascist precursors in Austria and Germany. Perhaps these 'new' guys have a more appealing slogan now, but it doesn't make them different to me.

[Broomstick]

The neos are always repackaging themselves.

I do think it's admirable the way Germans attempt to give shelter to refugees and address their past history in regards to intolerance. Unfortunately, this results in considerable friction between those with a long heritage in Germany and the newcomers. Neither segregation nor complete assimilation are the answer, finding a happy medium where everyone hangs onto what they see as important parts of their culture while also finding common ground with everyone else in the country is not easy.

[salm]

The neos are always repackaging themselves.

I do think it's admirable the way Germans attempt to give shelter to refugees and address their past history in regards to intolerance.

It is not admirable. Germany and Germans treat refugees and asylum seakers pretty badly. There were some skandals with security guards in asylum seaker homes being neo nazis and abusing their powers. A lot of the living spaces are disgusting, rotten places, they are overcrowded and maintained badly.
Germans living next to refugee homes can be very hostile towards these people as well.

[Fingolfin_Noldor]

The neos are always repackaging themselves.

I do think it's admirable the way Germans attempt to give shelter to refugees and address their past history in regards to intolerance.

It is not admirable. Germany and Germans treat refugees and asylum seakers pretty badly. There were some skandals with security guards in asylum seaker homes being neo nazis and abusing their powers. A lot of the living spaces are disgusting, rotten places, they are overcrowded and maintained badly.
Germans living next to refugee homes can be very hostile towards these people as well.

Isn't xenophobia really the greater threat than just the more extreme neo-nazism?

[salm]

The neos are always repackaging themselves.

I do think it's admirable the way Germans attempt to give shelter to refugees and address their past history in regards to intolerance.

It is not admirable. Germany and Germans treat refugees and asylum seakers pretty badly. There were some skandals with security guards in asylum seaker homes being neo nazis and abusing their powers. A lot of the living spaces are disgusting, rotten places, they are overcrowded and maintained badly.
Germans living next to refugee homes can be very hostile towards these people as well.

Isn't xenophobia really the greater threat than just the more extreme neo-nazism?

Yes. Neo Nazis can be a very violent problem but at least they are a small group. Wide spread xenophobia and latent racism are very wide spread in Germany, though, and I assume in large parts of Europe. We need to fight the roots of this nonesense somehow.

[GuppyShark]

Wide spread xenophobia and latent racism are very wide spread in Germany, though, and I assume in large parts of Europe. We need to fight the roots of this nonesense somehow.

Xenophobia and racism are widely spread in large parts of humanity, it's a global problem. We have that in common at least!

[salm]

Wide spread xenophobia and latent racism are very wide spread in Germany, though, and I assume in large parts of Europe. We need to fight the roots of this nonesense somehow.

Xenophobia and racism are widely spread in large parts of humanity, it's a global problem. We have that in common at least!

Yes, but Germans love to believe that it is practically gone since WWII and that racism and xenophobia are isolated occurances when in reality it is a wide spread problem. We love to point our fingers at the US or Berlusconi Italy and Wilders Holland but we have very similar amounts of idiots right here on our doorsteps.

[Broomstick]

The neos are always repackaging themselves.

I do think it's admirable the way Germans attempt to give shelter to refugees and address their past history in regards to intolerance.

It is not admirable. Germany and Germans treat refugees and asylum seakers pretty badly.

I didn't say the Germans were better than anyone else, but compared to how things were in WWII there has been a vast improvement. Even so Europe, for all its flaws, is more tolerant of immigrants than some other parts of the world.

It has always sucked to be a refugee and an exile.

[Phillip Hone]

Recently, one of my German friends went off on a tirade about how unbelievable it is that people in the US want to keep immigrants from Mexico/South America out, saying they're hard working people who just want to come here and work and make better lives for them and their families.

Then right after he said that he thinks Germany should just kick out all the Muslims and bar them from entry because they don't want to work or become Germans.

This kinda puzzled me. Is this type of position common in Germany?

When I was there I was struck by how everyone was very liberal but had some weird race stuff going on.

"Are there lots of black people in your city?"
Me: ...
[in English because they thought I didn't understand] "You know, n*****s!" *laughing*

Also, overheard from two Germans talking about a black soccer player:
"The Ne*** (German N-word? I've heard mixed things about this) plays so roughly!"
"Yeah, because they all live in the ghetto."

I heard a lot of things like this and it kinda gave me the impression that Germans are generally a little bit racist, perhaps even more than people in the US, but they don't seem as racist because there are so few "Ne***s" around.

[Alyrium Denryle]

The neos are always repackaging themselves.

I do think it's admirable the way Germans attempt to give shelter to refugees and address their past history in regards to intolerance.

It is not admirable. Germany and Germans treat refugees and asylum seakers pretty badly.

I didn't say the Germans were better than anyone else, but compared to how things were in WWII there has been a vast improvement. Even so Europe, for all its flaws, is more tolerant of immigrants than some other parts of the world.

It has always sucked to be a refugee and an exile.

Plus, even if it does suck to be a refugee and an exile (no matter where you are), there is at least the general consensus in Germany and the rest of Europe that significant numbers of refugees should be taken in. Even if some elements of the population are douchebags.

Take refugees from Afghanistan. Germany has taken in over 31 thousand. The US has taken in about 1000. Even Russia has taken in more Afghani refugees than we have. Asylum seekers from Afghanistan. 130 for the US, over 15 thousand in Germany. From Syria, we have taken in 1400 refugees and 367 asylum seekers. Germany has taken in 18000 and 6000 respectively.

Recently, one of my German friends went off on a tirade about how unbelievable it is that people in the US want to keep immigrants from Mexico/South America out, saying they're hard working people who just want to come here and work and make better lives for them and their families.

Then right after he said that he thinks Germany should just kick out all the Muslims and bar them from entry because they don't want to work or become Germans.

This kinda puzzled me. Is this type of position common in Germany?

It is a problem you run into with ethnic nation states. The US does not have an "Ethnicity". Germany does, and while it is (to outsiders, not necessarily Americans because some people THINK we have an ethnicity) recognized that latin american immigrants dont threaten our Americanness, the existence of immigrants from Turkey et al is seen by some Germans as threatening their Germanness (even though to us americans as outsiders--and to a great many germans--this usually makes little sense either).

Or at least that is how the HUGE piles of cognitive dissonance get resolved.

[salm]

The neos are always repackaging themselves.

I do think it's admirable the way Germans attempt to give shelter to refugees and address their past history in regards to intolerance.

It is not admirable. Germany and Germans treat refugees and asylum seakers pretty badly.

I didn't say the Germans were better than anyone else, but compared to how things were in WWII there has been a vast improvement. Even so Europe, for all its flaws, is more tolerant of immigrants than some other parts of the world.

It has always sucked to be a refugee and an exile.

There is still nothing admirable. WWII is not exactly a good standard to go by. The situation is bad, it is degrading, exhausting and actally dangerous (health risks) for asylum seakers and ashaming for this country.

Being forced to flee from a war zone is bad enough and it doesnt help if the country you go to treats you like shit and gives you a decease ridden hell hole to live in which you have to share with the local homeless alcoholics.

We should be offering them decent homes and try to integrate them into society as quickly as possible. But we offer them scabies and Residenzpflicht and then wonder when some turn into drug dealers.

[Broomstick]

OK, but point me to a country where the average asylum seeker gets anything better than that.

Every single one of my ancestors who came to the US came as refugees. They all spent years in ghettos and faced discrimination. Sure, you're right that asylum seekers should be treated better. I don't see where Germany is so much worse than anywhere else.

[salm]

OK, but point me to a country where the average asylum seeker gets anything better than that.

Every single one of my ancestors who came to the US came as refugees. They all spent years in ghettos and faced discrimination. Sure, you're right that asylum seekers should be treated better. I don't see where Germany is so much worse than anywhere else.

The Residenzpflicht linked to above is unique to Germany, so regarding that every other country is better.
Regarding quality of housing I dont know but I really hope other countries are doing a better job.

[Thanas]

Regarding quality of housing I dont know but I really hope other countries are doing a better job.

Italy and France don't even pretend to care about them, so no. If you ever walked a Roman park before 9am you would quickly realize that we could be doing things a lot worse (though we are not doing them that wonderfully either).

[Broomstick]

The German housing requirement reminds me of medieval ghettos, frankly. It may be unique at this time, but I doubt it's unique in history. Wasn't aware of it until you mentioned it. I was also under the impression that the German government tracks the residency of everyone in that nation far more than in some other places, such as the US, so I can't say I'm shocked they do that.

That said, what makes it unusual it being official policy and enforced. See the practice in the US known as redlining which, although usually applied based on race criteria also affected other groups such as immigrants. Immigrants being consolidated in enclaves, such as "Chinatown" or "Little Italy" is also somewhat reminiscent of the residenzpflicht even it it was never a legal requirement. It's one thing if immigrants want to voluntarily live together, it's another if it's forced and social forces can be as compelling as legal ones. One reason for enclaves in the US was protection from anti-immigrant groups, living in such places could not honestly be described as "voluntary" in many cases.

At least Germany allows immigrants to become citizens - look at a nation like Japan which makes it extremely difficult for that to happen, with the result that you can have multiple generations living their entire lives in Japan yet never becoming citizens.

Sure, there are bigots, there are problems of assimilation, but Germany went from slaughtering the "other" to treating them similar to how other comparable countries do in a remarkably short period of time. I can applaud that progress even while desiring them to improve their conduct further.

[Thanas]

What the fuck are you blathering on about? Residenzpflicht merely means that any person who applies for asylum cannot move outside a given area and must live in the housing provided for them (free of charge). They can freely move about in the entire state (with the exception of Bavaria and Saxony who limit it to districts).
You've got the wrong impression if you think that is in any way or form similar to medieval ghettos.

Once they have been fully approved they can move where they want.

[salm]

The applications take very long, more than half a year and up to over a year in some cases. In this time people can not travel freely and have to live in infested shitholes.
They may not work either or get an education. After being approved it is almost impossible to find work because Germans and other Europeans have to be employed before refugees. Only after 4 years of being approved does their working status change to normal.
Then we wonder why they are now career drug dealers.

[salm]

Regarding quality of housing I dont know but I really hope other countries are doing a better job.

Italy and France don't even pretend to care about them, so no. If you ever walked a Roman park before 9am you would quickly realize that we could be doing things a lot worse (though we are not doing them that wonderfully either).

You can allways do stuff worse. We could shoot them in the head on arrival but that is not the point. The point is that the status quo is bad and needs to be improved. I kind of doubt that there are no places with better housing quality but can´t seem to find good information on that.

[Thanas]

You can allways do stuff worse. We could shoot them in the head on arrival but that is not the point. The point is that the status quo is bad and needs to be improved. I kind of doubt that there are no places with better housing quality but can´t seem to find good information on that.

Scandinavia does this kind of thing much better than we are, but there is a reason we are destination #1 in Europe.

The applications take very long, more than half a year and up to over a year in some cases.

Sure, what do you propose to fix this?

In this time people can not travel freely and have to live in infested shitholes.

By that you mean they cannot cross state lines? Big whoop. And the infested shitholes is a temporary problem. Our politicians royally screwed this up but it is a temporary problem. The regular homes are pretty much the same ones we offer our unemployed ones.

They may not work either or get an education.

Only until they are approved.

After being approved it is almost impossible to find work because Germans and other Europeans have to be employed before refugees. Only after 4 years of being approved does their working status change to normal.

Now this is silly and I agree with it that as soon as they are approved they should be treated the same as everybody else.

[salm]

The applications take very long, more than half a year and up to over a year in some cases.

Sure, what do you propose to fix this?

Throw money at the problem and decrease application time and/or improve housing quality. Long applications wouldn´t be so bad if the housing situation wasn´s so increadibly bad.

By that you mean they cannot cross state lines? Big whoop. And the infested shitholes is a temporary problem. Our politicians royally screwed this up but it is a temporary problem. The regular homes are pretty much the same ones we offer our unemployed ones.

I think it is a big whoop. Also in Bavaria for example it is worse than state lines.
Temporary = longer than a year. That´s more than enough time to turn a perfectly fine Syrian automechanic or chemist into a desperate small time criminal. If you add the years after approval this gets even worse.
Regular unemployed don´t have to live in scabies infested mass housing with 7 people per room where people will rather sleep on unhinged doors than the provided matresses.

Only until they are approved.

It would be smarter to make the people become economically self sufficient as soon as possible. Even if that means that some of the people will get sent home with some educational tax euros "wasted" on them.


I personally know a couple of refugee families who got approved. Interestingly their stories are all rather similar. The fathers turned into alcoholics, the mothers divorced them after years of abuse, the daughters got a university degree and the sons turned into drug dealers and islamic fundamentalists. I strongly believe that these fathers an sons would not have cracked had they not went through the shit they had to and would they have been given a chance to support their families. Anectdotal, but seeing this sort of thing first hand strongly formed my oppinion on the matter.

[Broomstick]

What the fuck are you blathering on about? Residenzpflicht merely means that any person who applies for asylum cannot move outside a given area and must live in the housing provided for them (free of charge). They can freely move about in the entire state (with the exception of Bavaria and Saxony who limit it to districts).
You've got the wrong impression if you think that is in any way or form similar to medieval ghettos.

Once they have been fully approved they can move where they want.

Well, here in the US asylum seekers can live anywhere they want, or rather, anywhere either they can afford or someone is willing to give them shelter (we have a number of charities that supply housing to refugees). They are required to show up for various appointments and hearings, but as long as they're showing up the government over here really doesn't care where they live. It's the "MUST live here" aspect that freaks other people out.

When I consider it dispassionately I understand that there is nothing inherently bad about this, and perhaps some positives, such as consolidating services that serve such groups. It is the mandate to have your residence someplace that reminds me of the old ghettos, not the restrictions on day movements (although there have been precedents for that as well). It really does squick a lot of people out that a government, even a benign one, can dictate where people live. Chalk it up to cultural differences. It hits a lot of alarm buttons for people, particularly those who either have directly experienced very bad things from such government mandates, or are descendants of such people. While I agree it would be somewhat hysterical to see the current situation as the German government keeping certain groups conveniently consolidated for easy location and possible... removal...there is precedent for that sort of thing happening. I'm not going to tell a refugee who has survived such a situation that a fear of it re-occurring is entirely baseless.

Sorry, Thanas, Germans do still have some baggage from the sins of past generations. As I said, I think you folks have made a lot of progress but not everyone sees that.

[Thanas]

Throw money at the problem and decrease application time and/or improve housing quality. Long applications wouldn´t be so bad if the housing situation wasn´s so increadibly bad.

Housing situation was tolerable until the last year. Building new houses would take time. My preferred solution is housing them in units we don't currently use...throwing money at the problem is also a bit of a raw deal considering one cannot just write blank checks. I am not sure the solution will be that easy, not with many municipalities having little extra room anyway. Housing prices are on the up all over Germany....I guess we could relocate them all to the east but there is no way the politicians there will play ball.

I think identifying where housing is relatively cheap and unused and renting them places there would be the best solution and that is the way it would be done normally.

I think it is a big whoop. Also in Bavaria for example it is worse than state lines.

Right, I just said Bavaria and Saxony are the two exceptions. Did you miss that?

Temporary = longer than a year. That´s more than enough time to turn a perfectly fine Syrian automechanic or chemist into a desperate small time criminal. If you add the years after approval this gets even worse.

Why? That does not follow at all. They get enough to eat and free housing. That should be enough to deter them from turning into a criminal.

Regular unemployed don´t have to live in scabies infested mass housing with 7 people per room where people will rather sleep on unhinged doors than the provided matresses.

Agreed, see my remarks above.

It would be smarter to make the people become economically self sufficient as soon as possible. Even if that means that some of the people will get sent home with some educational tax euros "wasted" on them.

I disagree. We cannot just shorten a process that has already been streamlined in the past. Heck it has been streamlined to the point that only one single person has to agree with their story. How can you further streamline it?

I personally know a couple of refugee families who got approved. Interestingly their stories are all rather similar. The fathers turned into alcoholics, the mothers divorced them after years of abuse, the daughters got a university degree and the sons turned into drug dealers and islamic fundamentalists. I strongly believe that these fathers an sons would not have cracked had they not went through the shit they had to and would they have been given a chance to support their families. Anectdotal, but seeing this sort of thing first hand strongly formed my oppinion on the matter.

I lived 10 years near a refugee house in Northern Germany, guess my perspective is coloured by that as well.

It really does squick a lot of people out that a government, even a benign one, can dictate where people live. Chalk it up to cultural differences. It hits a lot of alarm buttons for people, particularly those who either have directly experienced very bad things from such government mandates, or are descendants of such people.

...every Government decides where people live. I don't see your point. In your country people who live in housing provided by the state also do not have the option to move where they want. (Take note that the state in Germany is all too happy if it does not have to pay, so if you find somebody to take you in more power to you). And last I checked in the US you can also be forbidden to cross state lines if you have certain legal proceedings going on.

In fact, given how the US government does not provide any government benefits to asylum seekers and actually detains them at interment camps for months.....I'd be much more concerned about the handling of the US on this matter.

[Irbis]

Plus, even if it does suck to be a refugee and an exile (no matter where you are), there is at least the general consensus in Germany and the rest of Europe that significant numbers of refugees should be taken in. Even if some elements of the population are douchebags.

Consensus? Heh, I wish. Hardly. Just read how it looks from the position of (important) outsider:

Pope Francis attacks EU over treatment of immigrants

‘We cannot allow the Mediterranean to become a vast graveyard,’ pontiff tells the European parliament

The European Union has aged and grown tired, forfeiting ideas and ideals in favour of pen-pushing, Pope Francis has complained in the first papal address to the European parliament in quarter of a century.

The first non-European pontiff in 1,200 years delivered a sombre and thoughtful, if less than stirring, message to more than 700 MEPs gathered in the parliament’s hemicycle in Strasbourg on France’s border with Germany. He berated Europe for its treatment of immigrants, for the hordes of young unemployed, for its treatment of older people and for its failure to see clearly.

In a speech devoted to the centrality of human dignity, Francis, 77, declared that the EU had lost its bearings. It had become “elderly and haggard”, hostage to a uniform economic model that undermined democracy while the centrality of human rights was becoming confused with and supplanted by individualistic narcissism.

The rest of the world viewed Europe with “aloofness, mistrust and suspicion”, the pontiff said.

The last pope to address the European parliament was John Paul II 26 years ago as Europe stood on the brink of seismic change, with communism collapsing the following year and ending the continent’s division into two hostile blocs.

John Paul called the EU a “beacon of civilisation”. The contrast on Tuesday was striking.

“We cannot allow the Mediterranean to become a vast graveyard,” Pope Francis said, in reference to the thousands of migrants who drown every year as they seek to reach southern Europe from north Africa and the Middle East.

The EU had to deal with the problem of immigration by drafting laws that protected both EU citizens and the rights of migrants. Instead, it was pursuing “policies of self-interest” that only fed the conflicts the migrants were fleeing.

“Unity does not mean uniformity,” said Francis, as he decried “uniform systems of economic power in the service of unseen empires”.

In keeping with his seemingly modest lifestyle, the Argentina-born pontiff arrived at the Strasbourg parliament in what looked like an ordinary four-seater grey Peugeot to large crowds of well-wishers.

The parliament’s president, Martin Schulz, a German social democrat and former bookseller, presented him with a book as a gift, a specially bound edition in Spanish of the memoirs of Jean Monnet, one of the EU’s founders.

As the pope departed the parliament after his 36-minute speech and a two-minute standing ovation, teenagers yelled “ciao”. He delivered his speech in Italian, and spoke in German, French, and English with EU dignitaries without translators present.

In his 20 months in the Vatican, the Strasbourg visit was only Francis’s second trip in Europe outside Italy after he went to Albania, one of Europe’s smallest and poorest countries.

“We encounter a general impression of weariness and ageing, of a Europe that is no longer fertile and vibrant,” he told the assembled legislators. “The great ideas that once inspired Europe seem to have lost their attraction, only to be replaced by the bureaucratic technicalities of its institutions.”

When boss of one of the most close-minded, aloof, conservative and aged organizations in the world complains you outdid it you might have a small problem on your hands.

[Broomstick]

...every Government decides where people live. I don't see your point. In your country people who live in housing provided by the state also do not have the option to move where they want.

Neither the US government nor the states provide housing. It provides vouchers for housing, which can be utilized either at publicly owned housing (i.e. "the projects") or with any private landlord willing to accept said vouchers. It's called "Section 8". The tenant-based vouchers are valid anywhere in the US or Puerto Rico. I don't know where you get this notion that the US government is dictating where people can live.

The only people that would apply to are convicted criminals or people like child molesters who are required as part of their punishment to report where they live. Oh, and people committed to mental institutions.

And last I checked in the US you can also be forbidden to cross state lines if you have certain legal proceedings going on.

Yes, but people applying for asylum or refugee status are not criminals. Granted I'm not a lawyer, but so far as I know seeking asylum is not one of those sorts of legal proceedings. Even when such proceedings are underway it is possible to have such restrictions modified for reasons such as employment or reuniting with family. Given that asylum seekers can qualify for a work permit as early as 150 days after submitting their application this is a plausible reason.

In fact, given how the US government does not provide any government benefits to asylum seekers and actually detains them at interment camps for months.....I'd be much more concerned about the handling of the US on this matter.

Ah, yes, a criticism of Germany always seems to come round to how the US is worse.... You do realize I'm one of your defenders here?

People arriving in the US as refugees are placed with resettlement agencies which formally contract with the Federal government and are responsible for providing housing, food, clothing, employment and educational services, medical care, and any other necessary services for the first 30-90 days refugees are in the US.

After that, they can receive refugee cash assistance and refugee medical assistance. Those are government funded programs. Unlike most immigrants, there is no 5 year waiting period for refugees to qualify for food stamps or Medicaid (poor people medical insurance), they should be able to qualify about the time their RCA and RMA are running out.

The laws that deny government benefits to US immigrants prior to becoming citizens explicitly do not apply to people with the legal status of refugees.

Likewise, people with the legal status of refugees are also allowed to work in the US and are protected by the same anti-discrimination laws that protect citizens. The only restriction is that they can not work for the US government outside of the armed forces prior to becoming citizens.

I'm not sure about these "internment camps" you refer to. A LOT of nations have set up camps for refugees and displaced persons and it's not generally to be mean to them. Australia seems to be particularly on everyone's watch list.

Yes, the US does have centers for people in this country illegally. Being an illegal alien does not automatically qualify you for asylum. People who were granted asylum prior to entering the US are not detained. People applying for it after they've been picked up for being here illegally might have to wait for a judge to make a determination. There is a movement to reform the current system but it's facing serious political opposition from the far right - I'm sure Germany also has some "get tough on immigrants" politics, too. Yes, being an illegal alien in the US can suck mightily - but refugees are not illegal immigrants.