Hundreds of Migrants Break Out of Holding Area in Hungary
Clashed with police yesterday.

Hungary, a member of the European Union since 2004 and of the passport-free Schengen Area since 2007, has been an entry point for migrants, largely from Syria, Iraq, and Afghanistan, at a rate of about 1,000 to 3,000 per day. CNN reports on an incident at the Serbian border today:
Dramatic scenes unfolded on the Hungarian-Serbian border Tuesday, as hundreds of frustrated migrants and refugees broke through police lines and ran from a holding area.
Some parents carried children on their shoulders, struggling to make their way across the rough ground near Roszke in Hungary.
As they ran across open corn and sunflower fields, police followed. But officers have not so far stopped any of the refugees.
The breakout happened suddenly and did not appear to be planned.
There were also reportedly scuffles between migrants, mostly headed for destinations in more prosperous Western Europe, and local police on Monday. The Hungarian government says it is holding the migrants as a matter of European Union procedure, so that they can be documented and registered.
The government believes more than 100,000 migrants have entered the country illegally so far this year. It announced it was building a fence along its 94-mile border with Serbia, Hungary says it is accelerating the construction of the fence, which was supposed to take a month to build.
According to the EU's "Dublin Regulation," the EU country at which a migrant first arrives must process the asylum application. About 34,000 migrants were "detected" entering Hungary in July. The European Commission sought to require EU countries to accept 40,000 refugees from Syria and Eritrea within the next two years, receiving a voluntary pledge of 32,500 instead. The EU also plans on accepting 20,000 refugees currently in UN camps in the wider region.
There were more than 600,000 asylum applications to EU countries in 2014—nearly a quarter of them filed in Germany, which is bordered on all sides by other EU countries, and Switzerland. Sweden came in second, receiving nearly 100,000. Sweden offered permanent residency to Syrian refugees starting in late 2013. Germany approved 48,000 asylum applications in 2014 and Sweden approved 33,000. Asylum seekers must show they would face risk of harm or death if they returned to their home countries. The EU has been struggling to "harmonize" asylum policies in EU countries for several years.
There are more than 4 million registered refugees fleeing the civil war in Syria alone.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Visigoths ?
Back o' the line - Syrians ahead of Visigoths!
I has sad. =(
#BarbarianLivesMatter
Put The Donald on the case.
It's too late if they're only just now building the wall. They need Christie: UPS tracking is the new self-deportation
You know who else kept people in holding areas in eastern Europe?
Alexander I?
Joseph Fritzl?
Not eastern, but... prove that he didn't!
Switzerland takes in very few total immigrants per year.
The EU has been pressuring them to not implement border controls that were called for in a 2014 referendum. https://euobserver.com/institutional/128281
I think the EU wants to be able to steer entrants to the cantons.
The Swiss are probably a lot less accomodating than the German, and don't need to cleanse themselves of genocide. In terms of asylum seekers, these border controls simply don't apply, since the usual UN rules apply.
Very much less accommodating - but the EU sees one more rich place to park people, so they are going to hold all sorts of agreements hostage. I suspect that will backfire - but who knows for sure?
Anything the EU does seems to backfire. Assad must be laughing his ass off right now.
Switzerland, historically, has been squeezed into changing it's fairly principled laws by foreign governments. Their free banking, respect for property rights and individual liberty has over the years been eroded by foreign government cartels who can't compete with their good governance.
*disclaimer*: I'm not saying Switzerland was formerly a utopia, or not downright hellish at times like during the periods of religious wars et cetera.
"It announced it was building a fence along its 94-mile border with Serbia, Hungary says it is accelerating the construction of the fence, which was supposed to take a month to build."
Stupid Hungarians, don't they know border fences are useless and cost too much?
Whatever Europeans may or may not do, the U.S. should turn away asylum applicants if they failed to seek asylum (or hardship visas, or whatever they're called) in the first (non-persecuting) country they came to.
So if, say, a Guatemalan slips into Mexico and wends his way to the U.S., he shouldn't be allowed to apply for asylum based on alleged persecution and/or hardship in Honduras. If he was so desperate, he should have applied for asylum to the Mexican authorities.
based on alleged persecution and/or hardship in *Guatemala.*
It's our duty, as distant wealthy foreigners, to care more about faraway regional crises than neighboring societies that actually live in the afflicted region.
Did you ever stop to consider that if Syrian migrants can't go to Germany, they'll instantly die? Germany is the only place in the world that isn't Syria.
OT why is Reason forcing https all of a sudden? I want my Reasonable back!
woodchippers
it's got to be the woodchippers
hard-coded URLs ftw
I don't think it's a question of if Obama will bring tens of thousands of Syrian refugees here to the United States. I think it's a question of when.
If Syrian refugees were gay or had Ebola, Obama would have brought them here already, but since they're not that, it'll take him about a week to get on board.
"largely from Syria, Iraq, and Afghanistan"
No mention of Muslims from the Balkins? Who are fleeing no war and make up about 40% of the refugees?
I could give a shit about Europe and their "refugees" but I am wondering why MSM is lying so very much about it. Why is Reason lying with MSM?
I don't think they're intentionally lying--for the most part. I think it's a combination of two things.
For one, I think they're genuinely unsure of what's happening, who makes up that group, and who's to blame for this crisis. They certainly can't blame it on anything that happened on Hillary or Obama's watch. That would be wrong.
Also, I think they're so concerned about political correctness that there are some facts with implications that are just too scary to report. How can you talk about the undesirability or fitness of Syrian refugees--and not say something that might seem pro-Trump or anti-immigration in regards to our own southern border?
I don't think they're intentionally lying--for the most part. I think it's a combination of two things.
Stupidity and ignorance?
You posting a link to back up that claim would be a good start.
For what it's worth, these Syrian refugees are trying to get back to Syria, apparently because the Uruguayan government won't give them high enough paying jobs.
http://www.businessinsider.com.....ere-2015-9
Don't let the door hit you on the way out.
these Syrian refugees are trying to get back to Syria,
What's stopping them?
They were turned back at a Turkish airport because they didn't have proper visas. The Turks literally put them back on a plane to Uruguay.
"But about 39 per cent were from the western Balkans and primarily seeking better economic opportunities, giving them little chance of qualifying for asylum."
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/5989.....b37f2.html
Les FU'ed link:
http://www.irishtimes.com/news.....-1.2343658
Thanks
That's actually a very credible source.
"That's actually a very credible source."
I was getting weird pay wall spam with the ft.com link. Made the article hard to read.
"Ms. Clinton, if you were President, would you open the door to the thousands of Syrian refugees?"
No journalist Hillary grants an audience with will ever ask her that question, but it's a question someone should ask a presidential candidate who is also a former Secretary of State, isn't it?
"Look, everyone knows I'm a liar, so why would you even care what I say, unless you're trying to score gotcha points when I break my promises?"
If Germany is taking hundreds of thousands per year we should be taking millions, right?
Some interesting work being done on the contrast between mainstream media reporting, which invariably focuses on photo-friendly families with small children, and social media, which has many pictures and accounts of immigrants who seem to mostly young men, acting like aggressive assholes.
If I was running a European country in the crosshairs of this mass migration, I'd be closing my borders, too. Maybe allowing women with children or intact family groups across, but no frickin' way would I let unattached you men, fresh from a jihadi hot zone, into my country. Period.
What's wrong with hostile Muslim men invading Hungary?
(wikipedia)
http://ow.ly/RWoW2
Unobfuscated link: Ottoman?Habsburg wars
What kind of invasion is it, what kind of colonization is it, when the invaders use our own guns and our own laws to enforce it?
The lazy kind, you get invaders who don't even want to put in the effort.
Only worst kind is stupid kind, when you let invaders come in, tell them they are now the military because your own population is plummeting, then not pay them and are shocked, shocked! when they sack Rome.
"No frickin' way would I let unattached you men, fresh from a jihadi hot zone, into my country. Period."
Well brace yourself, because if Obama doesn't turn his attention to bringing all the Syrian refugees he can to the U.S., I'll be really surprised.
He's distracted at the moment trying to make sure his capitulation to Iran deal goes through, and he's concerned about squandering what little political capital he has left--when he's about to spend it all on a climate change deal in Paris come December...
But I'd set the odds of Obama bringing thousands of Syrian refugees here to the United States at over 50%.
Why not? What's the worst that could happen?
This year, Germany expects to take in several hundred thousand immigrants (I've read estimates from 400,000 to 800,000). The attendant increase in German wealth and social harmony will prove once and for all that open borders is a workable policy.
So if, say, a Guatemalan slips into Mexico and wends his way to the U.S., he shouldn't be allowed to apply for asylum based on alleged persecution and/or hardship in Honduras. If he was so desperate, he should have applied for asylum to the Mexican authorities.
Oh, lord, don't click his name, he's a pornbot.
Shit, maybe I'll need to turn my computer into a doorstop now.
What, I cannot help but wonder, would be the reaction of "Europe" in the event that the throngs of migrants that confront European authorities were Jews?? Might history provide answers, or might the passage of years have served to change things??
How many the Vatican gonna take? What about it, Francis?