Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 18, 2023 14:24:52 GMT
Due process? If the UK stated that no one illegally entering the UK would be granted asylum then the very act of entering the UK illegally would render them criminals without qualifying for asylum. ...and they would be breaking international law. How so? France admits that the problem was the rules in the UK, which the loony left do not want addressed. |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Mar 18, 2023 14:25:55 GMT
Ah, so you was confused then. I notice that you keep asking the same question whether I answer it or not . Yeah, I'm very interested, Benny. I've been considering opening a thread titled '101 ways to avoid answering a question when you're snookered', put the question to you again there, and then watch you squirm over several pages. You should open another thread titled’ 101 ways of using George Orwell to disguise Nazi rhetoric’. I think it’s you doing the squirming and me doing the sneering darling . |
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Mar 18, 2023 14:27:39 GMT
Yeah, I'm very interested, Benny. I've been considering opening a thread titled '101 ways to avoid answering a question when you're snookered', put the question to you again there, and then watch you squirm over several pages. You should open another thread titled’ 101 ways of using George Orwell to disguise Nazi rhetoric’. I think it’s you doing the squirming and me doing the sneering darling . Is that what's happening, Benny? And you're still squirming. The question isn't going away. It'll only emerge again every time one of you gammons tries to blame France for the problem the UK has created for itself and for France. |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Mar 18, 2023 14:34:52 GMT
You should open another thread titled’ 101 ways of using George Orwell to disguise Nazi rhetoric’. I think it’s you doing the squirming and me doing the sneering darling . Is that what's happening, Benny? And you're still squirming. The question isn't going away. It'll only emerge again every time one of you gammons tries to blame France for the problem the UK has created for itself and for France. No darling . You swerved the conversation from you wriggling out of roping Orwell into your Nazi rhetoric by asking me to answer a stupid question that you proffered as a comparison to the migrant problem . I responded in the appropriate way..to mock it . Let me see now.. Do you have an answer to the question, Benny? There was no question Herr darling . Just you trying to rope Orwell into your Nazi rhetoric. And out of the blue…..There is a question: Who do you think would win in a UK court? X or the neighbour? |
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Mar 18, 2023 14:40:49 GMT
Is that what's happening, Benny? And you're still squirming. The question isn't going away. It'll only emerge again every time one of you gammons tries to blame France for the problem the UK has created for itself and for France. No darling . You swerved the conversation from you wriggling out of roping Orwell into your Nazi rhetoric by asking me to answer a stupid question that you proffered as a comparison to the migrant problem . I responded in the appropriate way..to mock it . Let me see now.. Do you have an answer to the question, Benny? There was no question Herr darling . Just you trying to rope Orwell into your Nazi rhetoric. And out of the blue…..There is a question: Who do you think would win in a UK court? X or the neighbour? And you still haven't answered. You didn't even have the imagination to make a link to the Nazis yourself. You simply took advantage of the 'in' Patman Post provided for you. You know that France isn't responsible. You know that the UK is the author of it's own misfortune. That's the real reason you won't answer the question, Benny. |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Mar 18, 2023 14:45:38 GMT
No darling . You swerved the conversation from you wriggling out of roping Orwell into your Nazi rhetoric by asking me to answer a stupid question that you proffered as a comparison to the migrant problem . I responded in the appropriate way..to mock it . Let me see now.. Do you have an answer to the question, Benny? There was no question Herr darling . Just you trying to rope Orwell into your Nazi rhetoric. And out of the blue…..There is a question: Who do you think would win in a UK court? X or the neighbour? And you still haven't answered. You didn't even have the imagination to make a link to the Nazis yourself. You simply took advantage of the 'in' Patman Post provided for you. You know that France isn't responsible. You know that the UK is the author of it's own misfortune. That's the real reason you won't answer the question, Benny. Answered what? A question you posed to get out of me pointing out your attempt to rope in Orwell with your inappropriate rhetoric? Your question was about a neighbours dump. My response was far better than you deserved darling |
|
|
|
Post by Steve on Mar 18, 2023 15:08:56 GMT
Exactly . Put them in secure holding camps until they can be deported. Are you saying we should concentrate them into camps? Where have I heard that before? In the Boys Book of Godwins's Law vol 2? Don't want to be locked up then don't try and cheat the system, simples. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 18, 2023 15:09:32 GMT
Since we are having a fantasy discussion lets inject a little seriousness. Lets say a boat arrives on our shores with 50 'asylum seekers' on board and that 49 of them are wishing to do us harm, as some on here seem to believe, but one is a real refugee, lets make it a woman and they, under this new law, are returned to their country of origin without processing and a few weeks later we discover that on arrival in her home country she was arrested, detained, starved, raped and beaten to death, would people on this site say it was worth it to get rid of the other 49? Honest answer only please. The interesting question is, why, if she has a genuine case, would she choose to commit a serious crime, knowing she would be refused if she did so, rather than just apply for asylum where she was? It's a null set. A see you have not actually answered the question, is it worth it? It is not actually a serious crime to enter a country by an 'illegal' method when you consider what some of these people have to put up with.. But lets consider how she may have ended up getting on one of the boats. Lets say she was pregnant, with twins, and the father of the twins raped and beat her because she did not wear a head covering, her friends helped her recover and arranged for her travel to the UK by boat to which she was not aware of the 'illegal' action she was taking, after all she was terrified and wanted to escape, she had no documents as the 'father' of her future children destroyed then so she could not leave. Is the 49 worth it? |
|
|
|
Post by Steve on Mar 18, 2023 15:10:20 GMT
So in your book, having a decent society is our fault. Do get real The French claim they are attracted by the black economy. And Pacifico has argued recently that more applications are accepted in the UK than elsewhere, thus making the UK more attractive. Here’s a question: X dumps all his rubbish in his back garden. After some time, the rubbish begins to attract rats. X notices that the rats are crossing his neighbour’s land to get to the rubbish in his garden. X sues his neighbour for not preventing the rats from crossing his garden. The neighbour countersues X, saying that X's backyard rubbish dump is drawing rats across his land, creating a nuisance for him. Who will win in a UK court? The above is how the French see it. And they have a point. And no, I'm not suggesting these people are rats. As you say it's how some French like to portray it, because they're lying rather than take any blame themselves. |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Mar 18, 2023 15:39:52 GMT
The interesting question is, why, if she has a genuine case, would she choose to commit a serious crime, knowing she would be refused if she did so, rather than just apply for asylum where she was? It's a null set. A see you have not actually answered the question, is it worth it? It is not actually a serious crime to enter a country by an 'illegal' method when you consider what some of these people have to put up with.. But lets consider how she may have ended up getting on one of the boats. Lets say she was pregnant, with twins, and the father of the twins raped and beat her because she did not wear a head covering, her friends helped her recover and arranged for her travel to the UK by boat to which she was not aware of the 'illegal' action she was taking, after all she was terrified and wanted to escape, she had no documents as the 'father' of her future children destroyed then so she could not leave. Is the 49 worth it? If she is the victim of crime in France, she should go to the French authorities. All you are doing is indirectly circling back on the claim that people have a legitimate reason to seek asylum from France in the Uk - they don't. |
|
|
|
Post by Montegriffo on Mar 18, 2023 15:57:55 GMT
Are you saying we should concentrate them into camps? Where have I heard that before? In the Boys Book of Godwins's Law vol 2? Don't want to be locked up then don't try and cheat the system, simples. What system? There is virtually no processing of asylum applications. Why do you think people have to risk their lives crossing the channel in leeky dinghies to apply? |
|
|
|
Post by wapentake on Mar 18, 2023 16:17:47 GMT
In the Boys Book of Godwins's Law vol 2? Don't want to be locked up then don't try and cheat the system, simples. What system? There is virtually no processing of asylum applications. Why do you think people have to risk their lives crossing the channel in leeky dinghies to apply? OMG the dinghies are made of leeks no wonder they sink  |
|
|
|
Post by Montegriffo on Mar 18, 2023 16:24:49 GMT
What system? There is virtually no processing of asylum applications. Why do you think people have to risk their lives crossing the channel in leeky dinghies to apply? OMG the dinghies are made of leeks no wonder they sink I wrote leaky first and the spellcheck underlined it so I changed it. I was set up. I demand to see my grammar lawyer. |
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Mar 18, 2023 16:27:49 GMT
And you still haven't answered. You didn't even have the imagination to make a link to the Nazis yourself. You simply took advantage of the 'in' Patman Post provided for you. You know that France isn't responsible. You know that the UK is the author of it's own misfortune. That's the real reason you won't answer the question, Benny. Answered what? A question you posed to get out of me pointing out your attempt to rope in Orwell with your inappropriate rhetoric? Your question was about a neighbours dump. My response was far better than you deserved darling It's called arguing by analogy. It's a valid debating technique that's used in the courts every working day of the week. In fact, it's how the common law develops. Sorry you don't think it's good enough for this place, Benny. Of course, you could just answer the question. |
|
|
|
Post by Toreador on Mar 18, 2023 16:28:04 GMT
Even if they entered illegally. Yes. ...and remnained but didn't claim asylum. |
|
