«

»

Feb 09

Syrian Christians not welcome in UK

Syrian Christians arrive in Australia - the UK is taking very few Syrian Christians

Syrian Christian girls arrive in Australia to join their families – the UK is taking very few Syrian Christians. Photo: Barnabas Fund

The United Kingdom has let in very few Syrian Christian refugees. UK Christians assumed the Government would favour their brothers and sisters.  But a Christian aid charity says this has not happened.

the UK has been ‘out-sourcing’ refugee selection to the UN.  But this has meant a lack of balance in refugee numbers.

Out of over 4,000 Syrian refugees welcomed into the UK in 12 months, only 64 were Christian.  This is just 1.5%, whereas 10% of Syria’s population was Christian before the UK-supported anti-Assad civil war.

UN camps dominated by jihadists

Syrian Christians and other religious minorities have been reluctant to go to refugee camps run by the United Nations.  The reason is that jihadist groups run the camps.  The Christians say they are ‘discriminated against’ in such camps.  That could be putting it mildly.

Churches in Syria have been looted and damaged by jihadists, many of them funded by the UK

Churches in Syria have been looted and damaged by jihadists, many of them funded by the UK

Barnabas Fund’s Head of Research Dr Martin Parsons blamed the meagre numbers of Christians on the British government’s reliance on the UN. ‘Much of the UK’s problem lies with the UN, to whom the government continues to outsource its selection of Syrian refugees. It is imperative that the government challenges the UN on this deplorable situation,’ he said.

Barnabas Fund has instead been re-settling Christian refugees in countries such as Australia and Poland.  These have pro-Christian policies and do not rely on the UN.

The jihadist rule over UN refugee camps has an impact on refugee policy worldwide.  Syrian refugees can turn up anywhere in the world after UN processing.  But they will very likely be Sunni Muslims, the sect of Al-Qaeda and Islamic State.  At the very least they will have been exposed to radical Islamist ideas.  Indeed, Islamic State said they would use the refugee system to plant sleeper terrorists into Europe.

Syrian Christians deciding to stay

However, the UN’s collusion with the jihadis has had a side effect which could turn out well.  Many Syrian Christians are now opting to stay where they are.  UK MP’s moaned about the ‘fall’ of Aleppo in December.  But Syrian Christians welcomed the defeat of the jihadists.  Christians celebrated Christmas in Aleppo in 2016 for the first time in five years.

Signs of hope - Syrian engineers prepare to repair the water supply to Damascus

Signs of hope – Syrian engineers prepare to repair the water supply to Damascus

Since then the Syrian Army has been making more advances.  Days ago they secured the Wadi Barada water supply to Damascus.  The Syrian Government and the armed factions joined peace talks for the first time in January. And it was Russia, Turkey and Iran who brought this about, not the UK or US.

The Apostle Luke tells us, in Acts 11:26: ‘The disciples were called Christians first in Antioch’.  Antioch is now Antakya and lies just across the border inside Turkey.  And the Apostle Paul saw the light of Christ on the road to Damascus.  Syria has Christian history.  Syria’s Orthodox churches claim to be the most ancient in the world.

That is why some Syriac Christians say they are determined to stay.  They are proud of their historic roots and their high calling to be living witnesses of Christ’s love, mercy and grace.

We used to live in peace

The various religious groups managed to get along  before the uprising, despite deep differences.  Those who encouraged the civil war, the UK, the US, Soros, ruined a functioning nation for nothing.  But in the aftermath, Christians in Syria resent what was done.

‘We used to live in peace under Assad,’ a Syrian Christian told International Christian Concern. ‘Assad is not a perfect man, yet he gave the Christians freedom and rights the same as Muslims. We could wear what we wanted and we had churches all over the country.

‘Then when the uprising started, we began to see many Islamist jihadists from Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia. They began to kill us (the Christians) and other minorities who are considered infidels. The Islamists killed us with knives and even decapitated some and burned down our churches.

‘Now, Christians are not welcome under their Islamist rule. No Western country will give us visas. Many times, we feel like the whole world wants to see the Christians of Syria slaughtered.’

Petition to the Foreign Secretary

PRAY the UK Government will take no more Syrian Muslim refugees until they welcome Christians.  PRAY they will support Christians worldwide.  PRAY for the UK Government to stand for peace in Syria.  PRAY they understand that further support for rebel groups will only add to the bloodshed and destruction.  PRAY for them to accept reality and help bring the war to an end.  PRAY for them to send bricks to Syria and pressure Saudi Arabia to stop sending bombs and bullets.

Boris! Help Rebuild Syria!  Click here to sign our petition …

 

 

Share

22 comments

1 ping

Skip to comment form

  1. Rox

    If Austria and Poland are only happy with Christian refugees, which (in the case of Poland at least) is because of their isolation from Muslims and from any non-European residents in a history very different from ours, it does seem rather a good idea to send the Christian refugees to Austria and Poland.

    1. Stephen

      Australia. But the UK should not be taking in Syrian Muslim migrants from the refugee camps where they are likely to have been radicalised. They are putting your safety at risk.

      1. Rox

        Sorry about that, but I’m sure it’s basically true of Austria too, considering who nearly became president.

        It’s better to take in carefully selected Muslims from the refugee camps than just anybody who can get as far as Calais (or wherever it might be). You could say that these refugee camps are organised by the UN, whereas what we saw in Calais was organised by nobody except Muslim strongmen, possibly with strong ideas.

        1. Stephen

          The UN camps are the same. It happens in prisons too. A faction runs it internally. So you just do not get ‘carefully selected Muslims from the refugee camps’. Indeed, the idea you might is frankly preposterous.

          1. Rox

            Well, if careful screening doesn’t work before they leave the refugee camps, it isn’t going to work in more of a hurry at the borders of the UK or Trump’s USA either.

          2. Stephen

            That depends on how you view the so-called ‘screening’ that the UN is likely to do, compared with the selection criteria and ability of your own border force.

          3. Rox

            But you can screen the UN selected refugees yourselves TOO before you let them into your country. The two agencies would be looking for different things.

            Consider as an analogy getting poor children into “good” schools. There would be a charity or a local authority or some such body trying to benefit what it considered the worthiest cases, but the school would nonetheless be looking for the intelligence and other abilities which would benefit the record of the school. like with any other entrant.

          4. Stephen

            No. Having flown the refugees all the way over from the UN camp you cannot send them back again!

          5. Rox

            I expect the British authorities have realised that it makes more sense to have their people in (say) Jordan where the refugees are. They have done that with France.

          6. Stephen

            It’s the UN that owns the camps in (say) Jordan and the jihadists who run them. The jungle in Calais was a French set-up. Still run by the jihadists internally, of course. The answer still is: ‘Don’t take Muslim refugees.’

          7. Rox

            Unless you have checked their credentials carefully. Even Trump is aiming to do that eventually.

            The jungle was not an official French set up. It was a sort of squatter camp where the law of the jungle operated, hence the name. The French authorities repeatedly demolished it, which they would not have done if they had set it up in the first place.

          8. Mark Jones

            I would shorten that to “Don’t take Muslims” full stop. I have posted extensively on other threads about the threat that many of them pose. Not all muslims are violent; obviously most are not, because they are not running around killing people, but the religion itself condones violence. At the heart of Islam is pure violent evil.

            I think that many muslims just want a quiet life, but if at any stage they choose to become violent, their religion gives them carte blanche to go right ahead. And approximately upwards of half of the world’s muslims hold “radical” views, and therefore there is always the danger they will act on these: not that those in the West will admit to it (yet!), see the islamic doctrines of taqiyyah and kitman.

            The leftists in the West, and our friend Rox, seem quite oblivious to the threat to our civilisation that these people pose, the biggest threat to Western civilisation since the Nazis imo. It seems we will only wake up when it is too late.

          9. Rox

            Mark is as bad as Donald Trump. I suspect he is planning to build a wall all round the coast, and charge it to the EU. Also one across Ireland, charged to the Irish Republic.

            Curiously enough, it’s Donald Trump and his band of men whom people have likened to Nazis, not leftists in the West. Trump often reminds me of Mussolini . I can’t think of any Labour or LiibDem MP who is remotely reminiscent of Hitler or Mussolini. Can Mark Jones give us some names, please ?

            Of course, you would expect to find the far-right parties on the right, as you do in France, the Netherlands, Germany , Austria, and elsewhere.

          10. Stephen

            I’m not sure the old ‘left v right’ paradigm works any more. After all, Labour is believed to be on the ‘left’ but is supposed to be the party of the working class. Supporting the working class is supposed to be a left-wing thing to do. Now, can anyone tell me how unfettered immigration – which appears to be a ‘left-wing’ policy – helps Britain’s working class?

          11. Rox

            I’ll have a go.

            Unfettered immigration into Germany might help British working-class people whose industries have been virtually closed down by a right-wing government in this country, whereas there are still similar jobs to be had in Germany. I believe this has happened.

            They could of course pick vegetables instead, but they don’t really want to do that, and fortunately for everybody there is a ready supply of working-class immigrants from Lithuania and Poland who do.

            Nor are British workers forced by job centres to work in cafés if they don’t want to, because an often interesting immigrant population will do that work. The British worker can choose different work, either here or somewhere sunnier.

            But don’t forget that right-wing parties have always purported to look after the working-class too, at least since they got the vote in democracies.

          12. Stephen

            So… How does unfettered immigration help the working class?
            (1) Immigration into Germany helps British workers who want to emigrate there.
            (2) Immigration into the UK allows the workshy to stay idle.
            Er… that’s it?

  2. Rox

    No, not all of it at all. Just examples.

    You forget that there is freedom of movement in all directions all around Europe, not just into the UK. So the British working class can work anywhere, not just Germany, exactly the same as working class foreigners can, or any class come to that.

    Your (2) is a fabrication if it’s suppose to come from me. I didn’t say that. I only mentioned different work or work elsewhere. This might include serving the needs of British people retired to Spain.

    Which brings in another advantage: British working-class people can retire to Spain, and many have done so.

    1. Mark Jones

      Welcome to The World Of Rox, Stephen!

    2. Stephen

      The flaws in the first argument are (1) the higher wages here compared with Eastern European EU countries and (2) our benefits system.
      On (2), you said British people don’t have to ‘work in cafés if they don’t want to’. They can ‘can choose different work’. Or ‘choose’ not to work at all if there are consequently no jobs or wages have been depressed. There is no advantage to British workers from Eastern European migrants entering our labour market and it is just silly, or blindly pro-EU, to pretend there is.
      As to retiring, you can go to Spain, or Ghana or Barbados, or Canada, or anywhere you want, EU or no EU.

      1. Mark Jones

        At the risk of appearing sycophantic, Stephen, I’m impressed by your logical, clear mind. Credit/encouragement where it is due. Rox’s”arguments” and statements are full of holes and half-truths, etc, but analysing and specifically (and doggedly and patiently(!)) identifying the flaws, as you do, is imo quite impressive. I’m not particularly good at it, and I’ve got a degree in Philosophy! It has, of course, probably a lot to do with your being born-again, knowing the truth and it setting us free etc.

        1. Rox

          I’m not so impressed by Stephen publishing the sycophantic praise, but not the criticism (for example,Stephen himself wrote “or choose not to work at all”, I didn’t ; Spain and many other countries are not in Eastern Europe, but see full posting if not deleted).

          My criticism was submitted at 23.31 on 17 Feb when Mark’s praise was not showing at all .

          But at 17.29 on 18 Feb, Mark’s praise is shown as having been submitted at 16.02 on 17 Feb. My criticism is showing to me as “Your comment is awaiting moderation” , invisible to anyone else. It would have been possible and more fair to publish both at the same time.

      2. Rox

        “you said British people don’t have to ‘work in cafés if they don’t want to’. They can ‘can choose different work’. Or ‘choose’ not to work at all..”
        You have added “choose not to work at all”. I didn’t say that.

        Nor did I suggest they should go to Eastern Europe. Spain is almost as far west as you can get in the EU.

        You mention our benefits system. You can still get your state pension paid if you retire to Spain. As far as I know, this is not so easy in Ghana (which I wouldn’t particularly recommend for retirement for many reasons — working-class British people seem to like their own “colonies” in Spain very much). If you’re thinking of the much flaunted welfare for people out of work etc, the last time I saw this analysed, an immigrant would be better off in real terms in France.

        So perhaps the benefit to British people is retiring to Spain, and to Spanish people is working in Britain. But are wages lower in France and Germany than in Britain, for those prepared to go there with the skills needed ? Of course, you don’t have to go if you don’t want to, and most people don’t. The immigrants we see here are very enterprising. Give them some credit for that. How many English people would learn Lithuanian so as to go and pick a crop in Lithuania?

        Mark, your head is deeply buried in the sand. This is not the “World of Rox”, it’s the world of the European Union, where you live (as far as I know). We have been in this world since 1973. That is 44 years.Following the Second World War, ,we were only in the Mark World (outside the then Common Market) for 27 years. Between the two world wars was only 21 years. I know very well which period was the most prosperous for working-class people, and in which period the possibility of war in Europe was lowest for everybody,

Leave a Reply