|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Aug 24, 2023 12:05:59 GMT
And because it is lazy and populist to consider France as the garbage can of the UK's problems even after the UK voted to cut ties with France and the EU. It always gets applause from the other lazy populists. What! You seem to be under the impression that hundreds of thousands of illegals are crossing the channel from England to France! If you take your head out of your arse you may see that it is in fact the other way around. Yes indeed, EU and French authorities are happy to look the other way as EU/French garbage floats across the channel to England. |
|
|
|
Post by dappy on Aug 24, 2023 12:13:12 GMT
You must surely by now realise Red that using the language you do just makes you and your arguement look silly.
|
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Aug 24, 2023 12:17:01 GMT
No, they are coming THROUGH France. Not FROM France. They are entering the UK FROM France. The point of course being that have no legitimate reason to do so - |
|
|
|
Post by andrewbrown on Aug 24, 2023 13:29:54 GMT
No, they are coming THROUGH France. Not FROM France. Stop being a pedant ffs. They are in the safe state of France, prior to that they were in the safe states of Germany, Austria, Switzerland, Italy, Belgium, Spain before paying a criminal to get them from the safe state of France to the safe state of England. In what possible paradigm are these people asylum seekers or refugees? FFS you have absolutely no concept of asylum seeker or refugee. They are criminals. It isn't pedantry, it's actually very material to the fact. The reason that you keep ignoring this "pedantry" is that it exposes your rants as incorrect. |
|
|
|
Post by andrewbrown on Aug 24, 2023 13:31:04 GMT
No, they are coming THROUGH France. Not FROM France. They are entering the UK FROM France. The point of course being that have no legitimate reason to do so - That's immaterial. As long as they haven't settled in France or made a claim there, that is irrelevant. |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Aug 24, 2023 13:38:23 GMT
They are entering the UK FROM France. The point of course being that have no legitimate reason to do so - That's immaterial. As long as they haven't settled in France or made a claim there, that is irrelevant. It's not immaterial at all. The notion behind asylum is that sometimes people have to irregularly enter a country in order to escape a danger. This is clearly not the case if they are leaving France to enter the UK. So basically you are attempting to support fraud with semantics. Why would you do that? |
|
|
|
Post by Handyman on Aug 24, 2023 13:53:06 GMT
In todays media so far this year just over 19,000 alleged asylum seekers economic migrants what ever you want to call have landed in England unlawfully they are funding organised International Criminals
Tony Smith the former Head of Border Force states that those on board the boats refuse assistance or any aid from French Vessels whilst they are in French Waters as they know if rescued by the French they will be returned to France.
He claims the French are misinterpreting the rules of the sea , they will follow the boats but not stop them or go to their aid, IMHO overloaded rubber boats in the Channel means they are in trouble within seconds .
If they get into English Waters they will happily accept assistance and as soon as they are on board will claim Asylum.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Aug 24, 2023 14:09:57 GMT
No, they are coming THROUGH France. Not FROM France. Not in the context of the UK - illegal cross channel migrants into the UK are coming from France. They may well cross through France but it is an issue for the French as to whether they allow illegal migrants to travel through their country. |
|
|
|
Post by oracle75 on Aug 24, 2023 14:23:06 GMT
That's immaterial. As long as they haven't settled in France or made a claim there, that is irrelevant. It's not immaterial at all. The notion behind asylum is that sometimes people have to irregularly enter a country in order to escape a danger. This is clearly not the case if they are leaving France to enter the UK. So basically you are attempting to support fraud with semantics. Why would you do that? Asylum is to correct the danger. That the endangered are having by geography to travel through one if nor more countries means thry are not seeking asylum from those countries but from their ORIGINAL country. Why donr you suggest they "go back" to libya or the Netherlands or any country between Syria and GB? Why is it always France? Dont bother. I already know. |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Aug 24, 2023 14:30:08 GMT
It's not immaterial at all. The notion behind asylum is that sometimes people have to irregularly enter a country in order to escape a danger. This is clearly not the case if they are leaving France to enter the UK. So basically you are attempting to support fraud with semantics. Why would you do that? Asylum is to correct the danger. That the endangered are having by geography to travel through one if nor more countries means thry are not seeking asylum from those countries but from their ORIGINAL country. The morally legitimate part of their journey under the umbrella status of 'escaping danger and therefore having no choice but to move' ends when they have escaped the danger. |
|
|
|
Post by dappy on Aug 24, 2023 14:51:35 GMT
Only in your world Orac not in the world accepted by pretty much all relevant bodies.
Come on, we shouldn't have to keep going over the same ground over and over again here. Surely it be boring everyone by now.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on Aug 24, 2023 14:53:43 GMT
You must surely by now realise Red that using the language you do just makes you and your arguement look silly. Meanwhile your argument looks silly regardless of the language it's couched in. |
|
|
|
Post by oracle75 on Aug 24, 2023 14:56:47 GMT
Why should France help a sovereign country who brayed abour controlling its own borders when it has its own problems which, it must be said, are resolved within 6 months. "Germany, Spain, France and Italy account for 74% of first-time asylum applicants. In March 2023, Germany (25 170), Spain (15 570), France (11 870) and Italy (11 335) received the highest number of first-time asylum applicants, accounting for almost three-quarters (74%) of all first-time applicants in the EU.Jun 26, 2023" ec.europa.eu › eurostat › web Almost 86 000 asylum seekers in March 2023 - Products Eurostat News commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn01403/0lease note the official UK government definotions of asylum. Asylum is protection given by a country to someone fleeing from persecution in their own country. FROM THEIR OWN COUNTRY. Not the one which happens to be bext door. CONTROL YOUR OWN BORDERS. France does. Asylum seekers , far more than in the UK, are cleared in 6 months. And stop being your government's doll wirh a string being pulled in the back. Look to your real problems...NHS, housing, the extortionate amount of money wasted on HS2. Why should France which you have made abundantly clear you blame for whatever ails you, help you out? Grow some and be sovereign country because you sure aint behaving like one. |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Aug 24, 2023 15:07:00 GMT
Only in your world Orac not in the world accepted by pretty much all relevant bodies. Not at all. It is the case in any common sense moral framework If i have a special moral dispensation because i am in a situation and doing something to escape it, that allowance shouldn't continue when i'm not in the situation and (ergo) no longer pursuing my actions to escape it. If ,for instance, you run into a neighbour's garden / house to avoid a house fire (or similar), then we might expect the usual rules be waived for you due to your 'special circumstance'. However, we wouldn't expect that special, exceptional status to persist so that you can legally break into house, after house, after house 'because your house is on fire'. Someone attempting such would obviously be committing a fraud, even if there were some legal loophole that allowed it. |
|
|
|
Post by dappy on Aug 24, 2023 15:14:37 GMT
As has been explained so many times Orac, if someone has been forced to flea their home due to fear of persecution, there is no legal or in my view moral reason why they should seek that sanctuary in the first "safe" country they arrive in.
|
|
