Calais migrant trouble

Page 14 of 85 < 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 >

legaleagle 27 Jul 15 1.15pm
Quote leggedstruggle at 27 Jul 2015 12.35pm Perhaps you could run through the tremendous benefits that ordinary black people in Zimbawe have enjoyed under Mugabe. IMO you must be stunningly misinformed if you think they are better off than they were under Smith. Edited by leggedstruggle (27 Jul 2015 12.36pm) A few examples: 1. greater access to education 2.improved adult literacy. 3.reduction in child mortality. 4. greater access to employment beyond the menial. Things that are of no relevance to a person of ingrained prejudice Edited by legaleagle (27 Jul 2015 1.39pm)
Alert a moderator to this post

legaleagle

27 Jul 15 1.15pm

Quote leggedstruggle at 27 Jul 2015 12.35pm

Perhaps you could run through the tremendous benefits that ordinary black people in Zimbawe have enjoyed under Mugabe. IMO you must be stunningly misinformed if you think they are better off than they were under Smith.

Edited by leggedstruggle (27 Jul 2015 12.36pm)

A few examples:

1. greater access to education

2.improved adult literacy.

3.reduction in child mortality.

4. greater access to employment beyond the menial.

Things that are of no relevance to a person of ingrained prejudice

Edited by legaleagle (27 Jul 2015 1.39pm)

Alert a moderator to this post

legaleagle 27 Jul 15 1.18pm
Quote Stirlingsays at 27 Jul 2015 12.52pm There were benefits and disadvantages to colonial rule. They were 'crimes of their times' and revisionism that includes taking responsibility for national actions of centuries ago seems a little pointless to me. Other than that,as was the point of my post we are not simply talking "centuries ago" but until the recent past,within living memory...
Alert a moderator to this post

legaleagle

27 Jul 15 1.18pm

Quote Stirlingsays at 27 Jul 2015 12.52pm

There were benefits and disadvantages to colonial rule. They were 'crimes of their times' and revisionism that includes taking responsibility for national actions of centuries ago seems a little pointless to me.

Other than that,as was the point of my post we are not simply talking "centuries ago" but until the recent past,within living memory...

Alert a moderator to this post

npn Crowborough 27 Jul 15 1.25pm
Simple solution: EU wide asylum policy. Regardless of where you enter the EU, you go into a pot and are allocated to whichever country is next in line (so if you apply in England or in Germany, your application is processed in the same way and if successful you are allocated to individual countries of the EU based on rules). Asylum seekers can register a preference which can be taken into account where possible. That way: 1. There would be no reason to risk your life to get to a preferential location (as it will make no difference to where you end up) 2. The burden would be spread more evenly across the EU (we're not really pulling our weight as it is) 3. The EU as a whole makes the decision on whether yours is a genuine claim, so there's no difference between policies. Just a thought
Alert a moderator to this post

npn

Crowborough 27 Jul 15 1.25pm

Simple solution: EU wide asylum policy.

Regardless of where you enter the EU, you go into a pot and are allocated to whichever country is next in line (so if you apply in England or in Germany, your application is processed in the same way and if successful you are allocated to individual countries of the EU based on rules).

Asylum seekers can register a preference which can be taken into account where possible. That way:
1. There would be no reason to risk your life to get to a preferential location (as it will make no difference to where you end up)
2. The burden would be spread more evenly across the EU (we're not really pulling our weight as it is)
3. The EU as a whole makes the decision on whether yours is a genuine claim, so there's no difference between policies.

Just a thought

Alert a moderator to this post

Cucking Funt Clapham on the Back 27 Jul 15 1.37pm
Quote reborn at 27 Jul 2015 12.15pm Wow, going by some of the posters on here the country is already fcked. Frankly I am glad to live somewhere so safe and prosperous (relatively), that people will endure hell and risk death just to reach it. Maybe some of you should think about that next time you are sharpening your bayonets for the filthy hordes at the gates. You are just no fun any more. Wife beating may be socially acceptable in Sheffield, but it is a different matter in Cheltenham
Alert a moderator to this post

Cucking Funt

Clapham on the Back 27 Jul 15 1.37pm

Quote reborn at 27 Jul 2015 12.15pm

Wow, going by some of the posters on here the country is already fcked.

Frankly I am glad to live somewhere so safe and prosperous (relatively), that people will endure hell and risk death just to reach it.

Maybe some of you should think about that next time you are sharpening your bayonets for the filthy hordes at the gates.

You are just no fun any more.

Wife beating may be socially acceptable in Sheffield, but it is a different matter in Cheltenham

Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays 27 Jul 15 1.37pm
Quote legaleagle at 27 Jul 2015 1.18pm Quote Stirlingsays at 27 Jul 2015 12.52pm There were benefits and disadvantages to colonial rule. They were 'crimes of their times' and revisionism that includes taking responsibility for national actions of centuries ago seems a little pointless to me. Other than that,as was the point of my post we are not simply talking "centuries ago" but until the recent past,within living memory... Let those who are connected to crimes take responsibility for them. I made that point in the original post. The time frame is besides the point. I'm not responsible for civil rights abuses in America just as in the same way I'm not responsible for some bellend being anti social at the end of my street. Edited by Stirlingsays (27 Jul 2015 1.41pm) 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)
Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays

27 Jul 15 1.37pm

Quote legaleagle at 27 Jul 2015 1.18pm

Quote Stirlingsays at 27 Jul 2015 12.52pm

Other than that,as was the point of my post we are not simply talking "centuries ago" but until the recent past,within living memory...

Let those who are connected to crimes take responsibility for them.

I made that point in the original post.

The time frame is besides the point.

I'm not responsible for civil rights abuses in America just as in the same way I'm not responsible for some bellend being anti social at the end of my street.

Edited by Stirlingsays (27 Jul 2015 1.41pm)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays 27 Jul 15 1.40pm
Quote reborn at 27 Jul 2015 12.37pm Firstly I am not rich by any means, secondly what on earth has my wealth or not got to do with the heartless and bigoted attitudes on here. Edited by reborn (27 Jul 2015 12.38pm) I must admit...upon reflection....When I see your posts and notice any attitude that I think is related to religious teaching I do nit-pick and moan at you. It's a flaw of mine and you have my apologies. 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)
Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays

27 Jul 15 1.40pm

Quote reborn at 27 Jul 2015 12.37pm

Firstly I am not rich by any means, secondly what on earth has my wealth or not got to do with the heartless and bigoted attitudes on here.

Edited by reborn (27 Jul 2015 12.38pm)

I must admit...upon reflection....When I see your posts and notice any attitude that I think is related to religious teaching I do nit-pick and moan at you.

It's a flaw of mine and you have my apologies.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert a moderator to this post

Catfish Burgess Hill 27 Jul 15 1.43pm
Quote npn at 27 Jul 2015 1.25pm Simple solution: EU wide asylum policy. Regardless of where you enter the EU, you go into a pot and are allocated to whichever country is next in line (so if you apply in England or in Germany, your application is processed in the same way and if successful you are allocated to individual countries of the EU based on rules). Asylum seekers can register a preference which can be taken into account where possible. That way: 1. There would be no reason to risk your life to get to a preferential location (as it will make no difference to where you end up) 2. The burden would be spread more evenly across the EU (we're not really pulling our weight as it is) 3. The EU as a whole makes the decision on whether yours is a genuine claim, so there's no difference between policies. Just a thought Interesting ideas but how would you ensure that those with skills were not cherry picked, or families and aged applicants most likely to rack up medical and benefits bills were not offloaded in favour of young able bodied people? Would you trust the receiving country to manage the system in a neutral way? Also, once they are accepted into any one EU country what is to stop them moving to another one under free movement? It would only be a temporary delay until they got to their preferred country anyway. Yes, I am an agent of Satan but my duties are largely ceremonial
Alert a moderator to this post

Catfish

Burgess Hill 27 Jul 15 1.43pm

Quote npn at 27 Jul 2015 1.25pm

Simple solution: EU wide asylum policy.

Just a thought

Interesting ideas but how would you ensure that those with skills were not cherry picked, or families and aged applicants most likely to rack up medical and benefits bills were not offloaded in favour of young able bodied people? Would you trust the receiving country to manage the system in a neutral way?
Also, once they are accepted into any one EU country what is to stop them moving to another one under free movement? It would only be a temporary delay until they got to their preferred country anyway.

Yes, I am an agent of Satan but my duties are largely ceremonial

Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays 27 Jul 15 1.44pm
Quote npn at 27 Jul 2015 1.25pm Simple solution: EU wide asylum policy. Regardless of where you enter the EU, you go into a pot and are allocated to whichever country is next in line (so if you apply in England or in Germany, your application is processed in the same way and if successful you are allocated to individual countries of the EU based on rules). Asylum seekers can register a preference which can be taken into account where possible. That way: 1. There would be no reason to risk your life to get to a preferential location (as it will make no difference to where you end up) 2. The burden would be spread more evenly across the EU (we're not really pulling our weight as it is) 3. The EU as a whole makes the decision on whether yours is a genuine claim, so there's no difference between policies. Just a thought I'm literally foaming at the mouth.....If I look in the mirror I've no doubt that my eyes would be swiveling. In polite response to this.....No thanks. 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)
Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays

27 Jul 15 1.44pm

Quote npn at 27 Jul 2015 1.25pm

Simple solution: EU wide asylum policy.

Just a thought

I'm literally foaming at the mouth.....If I look in the mirror I've no doubt that my eyes would be swiveling.

In polite response to this.....No thanks.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert a moderator to this post

legaleagle 27 Jul 15 1.44pm
Quote Stirlingsays at 27 Jul 2015 1.37pm Quote legaleagle at 27 Jul 2015 1.18pm Quote Stirlingsays at 27 Jul 2015 12.52pm There were benefits and disadvantages to colonial rule. They were 'crimes of their times' and revisionism that includes taking responsibility for national actions of centuries ago seems a little pointless to me. Other than that,as was the point of my post we are not simply talking "centuries ago" but until the recent past,within living memory... Let those who are connected to crimes take responsibility for them. I made that point in the original post. The time frame is besides the point. I'm not responsible for civil rights abuses in America just as in the same way I'm not responsible for some bellend being anti social at the end of my street. Edited by Stirlingsays (27 Jul 2015 1.41pm) (Leaving aside whether a "full and final settlement" was or wasn't agreed post-war),should the German government be responsible for reparations to the families of those massacred in Greece 1941-45, or for paying back (with interest) the money the Greeks were forced to loan to Germany? Is it ok to say,it was their parents/grand parents not them and anyway,I wasn't personally involved?
Alert a moderator to this post

legaleagle

27 Jul 15 1.44pm

Quote Stirlingsays at 27 Jul 2015 1.37pm

Quote legaleagle at 27 Jul 2015 1.18pm

Quote Stirlingsays at 27 Jul 2015 12.52pm

Other than that,as was the point of my post we are not simply talking "centuries ago" but until the recent past,within living memory...

Let those who are connected to crimes take responsibility for them.

I made that point in the original post.

The time frame is besides the point.

I'm not responsible for civil rights abuses in America just as in the same way I'm not responsible for some bellend being anti social at the end of my street.

Edited by Stirlingsays (27 Jul 2015 1.41pm)

(Leaving aside whether a "full and final settlement" was or wasn't agreed post-war),should the German government be responsible for reparations to the families of those massacred in Greece 1941-45, or for paying back (with interest) the money the Greeks were forced to loan to Germany?

Is it ok to say,it was their parents/grand parents not them and anyway,I wasn't personally involved?

Alert a moderator to this post

npn Crowborough 27 Jul 15 1.47pm
Quote Catfish at 27 Jul 2015 1.43pm Quote npn at 27 Jul 2015 1.25pm Simple solution: EU wide asylum policy. Regardless of where you enter the EU, you go into a pot and are allocated to whichever country is next in line (so if you apply in England or in Germany, your application is processed in the same way and if successful you are allocated to individual countries of the EU based on rules). Asylum seekers can register a preference which can be taken into account where possible. That way: 1. There would be no reason to risk your life to get to a preferential location (as it will make no difference to where you end up) 2. The burden would be spread more evenly across the EU (we're not really pulling our weight as it is) 3. The EU as a whole makes the decision on whether yours is a genuine claim, so there's no difference between policies. Just a thought Interesting ideas but how would you ensure that those with skills were not cherry picked, or families and aged applicants most likely to rack up medical and benefits bills were not offloaded in favour of young able bodied people? Would you trust the receiving country to manage the system in a neutral way? Also, once they are accepted into any one EU country what is to stop them moving to another one under free movement? It would only be a temporary delay until they got to their preferred country anyway. First one is probably a good thing - by all means cherry-pick as payment for doing the processing (might even change some attitudes and get countries encouraging seekers to register and apply rather than accidentally stationing them right next to major border crossings and ignoring them in the hope they literally go away). Second one is true, but is that not the case already? Could someone apply for asylum in, say, France and then be free to cross legitimately to the UK?
Alert a moderator to this post

npn

Crowborough 27 Jul 15 1.47pm

Quote Catfish at 27 Jul 2015 1.43pm

Quote npn at 27 Jul 2015 1.25pm

Simple solution: EU wide asylum policy.

Just a thought

First one is probably a good thing - by all means cherry-pick as payment for doing the processing (might even change some attitudes and get countries encouraging seekers to register and apply rather than accidentally stationing them right next to major border crossings and ignoring them in the hope they literally go away).

Second one is true, but is that not the case already? Could someone apply for asylum in, say, France and then be free to cross legitimately to the UK?

Alert a moderator to this post

npn Crowborough 27 Jul 15 1.51pm
Quote Stirlingsays at 27 Jul 2015 1.44pm Quote npn at 27 Jul 2015 1.25pm Simple solution: EU wide asylum policy. Regardless of where you enter the EU, you go into a pot and are allocated to whichever country is next in line (so if you apply in England or in Germany, your application is processed in the same way and if successful you are allocated to individual countries of the EU based on rules). Asylum seekers can register a preference which can be taken into account where possible. That way: 1. There would be no reason to risk your life to get to a preferential location (as it will make no difference to where you end up) 2. The burden would be spread more evenly across the EU (we're not really pulling our weight as it is) 3. The EU as a whole makes the decision on whether yours is a genuine claim, so there's no difference between policies. Just a thought I'm literally foaming at the mouth.....If I look in the mirror I've no doubt that my eyes would be swiveling. In polite response to this.....No thanks. But why? I'm probably right of centre, but even I can't justify the current situation. Why not spread the burden? Let's be honest, it makes us less attractive as a destination if, on application, they are just as likely to end up in Athens as London. Also France would have nothing to gain by letting them set up camp and attempt to cross the border if they may very well get them back anyway. Another debate, I know, but if not for this sort of thing, what is the EU for?
Alert a moderator to this post

npn

Crowborough 27 Jul 15 1.51pm

Quote Stirlingsays at 27 Jul 2015 1.44pm

Quote npn at 27 Jul 2015 1.25pm

Simple solution: EU wide asylum policy.

Just a thought

I'm literally foaming at the mouth.....If I look in the mirror I've no doubt that my eyes would be swiveling.

In polite response to this.....No thanks.

But why?

I'm probably right of centre, but even I can't justify the current situation. Why not spread the burden? Let's be honest, it makes us less attractive as a destination if, on application, they are just as likely to end up in Athens as London. Also France would have nothing to gain by letting them set up camp and attempt to cross the border if they may very well get them back anyway.

Another debate, I know, but if not for this sort of thing, what is the EU for?

Alert a moderator to this post

corkery Cork City 27 Jul 15 1.54pm
Quote npn at 27 Jul 2015 1.25pm Simple solution: EU wide asylum policy. Regardless of where you enter the EU, you go into a pot and are allocated to whichever country is next in line (so if you apply in England or in Germany, your application is processed in the same way and if successful you are allocated to individual countries of the EU based on rules). Nope, ye caused the problem, ye can take them. It's not fair on other countries. We'll never die
Alert a moderator to this post

corkery

Cork City 27 Jul 15 1.54pm

Quote npn at 27 Jul 2015 1.25pm

Simple solution: EU wide asylum policy.

Nope, ye caused the problem, ye can take them. It's not fair on other countries.

We'll never die

Alert a moderator to this post

Page 14 of 85 < 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Crystal Palace FC Supporters' Website - The Holmesdale Online

Calais migrant trouble

Site Map

Sponsors