Britain outside the EU - Page 201

papa smurf · 13-11-2021, 10:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by ianch99

<in a Yoda voice>Denial is strong in this one</in a Yoda voice>

Pearl clutching does not become you. The Brexit was all about "controlling our borders" and actively encouraged xenophobia. Andrew's article is right on point and the irony is off the scale.

There is no agenda here, only reality.

<in a papa smurf voice>sulking about brexit is still strong in this one<in a papa smurf voice>

Carth · 13-11-2021, 10:56

From the quote by Andrew:

Quote:

officials were often able to prove that asylum seekers had passed through other countries thanks to the Eurodac fingerprint database. But since Brexit the UK no longer has access to that database, so it is harder to prove definitively which other European countries small boat arrivals to the UK have previously passed through.

If a migrant jumps in a boat on the French coast, he/she/they must have arrived in France via another European country . . unless they arrived in France through normal means, in which case let's see your passport

The need to 'prove' something that is glaringly obvious to everyone, is simply another case of European countries passing the buck . . aka 'we don't want them either'

**Chris** · 13-11-2021, 11:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by ianch99

<in a Yoda voice>Denial is strong in this one</in a Yoda voice>

Pearl clutching does not become you. The Brexit was all about "controlling our borders" and actively encouraged xenophobia. Andrew's article is right on point and the irony is off the scale.

There is no agenda here, only reality.

The cognitive dissonance is strong in this one.

Fretting over the mechanisms we use (or can no longer use) to deport illegal migrants back to other European countries is the very essence of xenophobia. The questions we ought to be asking are what factors drive them out of their home countries in the first place and how can we safely, with international cooperation, resettle them in the most appropriate places. Not how we’re going to get access to fingerprint records so that we can wash our hands of them and leave southern and Eastern European countries to deal with the problem.

Attempting to hitch that to an old debate about strains on UK public services caused by uncontrollable, legal movement of EU citizens is contemptible.

nomadking · 13-11-2021, 11:40

Nothing is driving them out. You can't claim you are in danger in a particular country, when you have travelled safely over thousands of miles through and INTO countries that are supposed to be dangerous. You can't have a situation where people in country A claim they are in danger, when they have travelled through countries B, C, etc, and people from those countries ALSO arrive claiming they are in danger. Just doesn't stack up.

You also can't claim your whole family is in danger, when you have left half of them behind, and years later they are all safe, including the twin brother of one of them.You can't claim asylum, when you are living safely in a country and have a job, house etc, but you want to move to another specific country, that won't let you.
How on earth is it only the UKs responsibility to deal with unaccompanied minors? Why aren't France etc legally responsible. Why aren't the EU courts all over the French etc?

If somebody has come from the French coast, then that is where they LEGALLY should be returned to. To do otherwise would be kidnapping, as they have no basis for being in the UK.

**Hugh** · 13-11-2021, 12:31

Pretty sure that if someone travels somewhere of their own volition, it isn't kidnapping...

You appear to be stating that if refugees/asylum seekers apply to stay in this country, and the UK Government lets them stay here whilst their cases are being considered, the UK Government has kidnapped the refugees/asylum seekers.

Is that really what you meant?

ianch99 · 13-11-2021, 17:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris

The cognitive dissonance is strong in this one.

Fretting over the mechanisms we use (or can no longer use) to deport illegal migrants back to other European countries is the very essence of xenophobia. The questions we ought to be asking are what factors drive them out of their home countries in the first place and how can we safely, with international cooperation, resettle them in the most appropriate places. Not how we’re going to get access to fingerprint records so that we can wash our hands of them and leave southern and Eastern European countries to deal with the problem.

Attempting to hitch that to an old debate about strains on UK public services caused by uncontrollable, legal movement of EU citizens is contemptible.

You are so missing the point here. Ok, I'll spell it out: Brexit, to a lot of people, was about "taking back control" especially of our borders and now we have (!), it is easier for migrants to come here. Poetic irony.

BTW, who is "Fretting over the mechanisms we use (or can no longer use) to deport illegal migrants"?

Mad Max · 13-11-2021, 17:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carth

From the quote by Andrew:

If a migrant jumps in a boat on the French coast, he/she/they must have arrived in France via another European country . . unless they arrived in France through normal means, in which case let's see your passport

The need to 'prove' something that is glaringly obvious to everyone, is simply another case of European countries passing the buck . . aka 'we don't want them either'

Bang on, punt them back to where they came from, France, most of those arriving here are young men, there are a few women and children, but the majority are young men, and who knows what the hell we're letting in, we cannot keep letting these people just turn up on our shores and shown the way to the benefits office!

ianch99 · 13-11-2021, 18:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by papa smurf

<in a papa smurf voice>sulking about brexit is still strong in this one<in a papa smurf voice>

Bless

nomadking · 13-11-2021, 19:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hugh

Pretty sure that if someone travels somewhere of their own volition, it isn't kidnapping...

You appear to be stating that if refugees/asylum seekers apply to stay in this country, and the UK Government lets them stay here whilst their cases are being considered, the UK Government has kidnapped the refugees/asylum seekers.

Is that really what you meant?

They've come from France, so that is where they have to be returned to. That is the last country they were in.

**Hugh** · 13-11-2021, 20:03

And what has that got to do with kidnapping?

1andrew1 · 13-11-2021, 21:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by nomadking

They've come from France, so that is where they have to be returned to. That is the last country they were in.

But you voted against making this possible in 2016. Have you changed your mind?

**Chris** · 13-11-2021, 21:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

But you voted against making this possible in 2016. Have you changed your mind?

Now come on - that’s untrue and you know it. Perhaps you would like to exercise a little honesty here and rephrase this so it reflects reality.

The Graun article you posted yesterday doesn’t even make that claim.

1andrew1 · 13-11-2021, 22:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris

Now come on - that’s untrue and you know it. Perhaps you would like to exercise a little honesty here and rephrase this so it reflects reality.

The Graun article you posted yesterday doesn’t even make that claim.

I believe it's fair and reflects reality, so I'll expand.

Nomadking knows from the article I posted that we can't just send illegal immigrants back to France anymore as we've left the EU. He is now stating that we should do exactly that. So it suggests he's changed his mind on Brexit as the only way we can do what he proposes is by rejoining the EU. And that makes perfect sense as many others have changed their minds recently too. 53% now back membership.

Source: https://twitter.com/SavantaComRes/st...238301/photo/1
https://comresglobal.com/who-we-are/

Sephiroth · 13-11-2021, 22:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

I believe it's fair and reflects reality, so I'll expand.

Nomadking knows from the article I posted that we can't just send illegal immigrants back to France anymore as we've left the EU. He is now stating that we should do exactly that. So it suggests he's changed his mind on Brexit as the only way we can do what he proposes is by rejoining the EU. And that makes perfect sense as many others have changed their minds recently too. 53% now back membership.

Source: https://twitter.com/SavantaComRes/st...238301/photo/1
https://comresglobal.com/who-we-are/

You may be right. If not, if we are to send them back, then it's showtime. Does the Guvmin have the balls for that? France is laughing its ass off.

**Chris** · 13-11-2021, 22:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

I believe it's fair and reflects reality, so I'll expand.

Nomadking knows from the article I posted that we can't just send illegal immigrants back to France anymore as we've left the EU. He is now stating that we should do exactly that. So it suggests he's changed his mind on Brexit as the only way we can do what he proposes is by rejoining the EU. And that makes perfect sense as many others have changed their minds recently too. 53% now back membership.

Source: https://twitter.com/SavantaComRes/st...238301/photo/1
https://comresglobal.com/who-we-are/

Nice pivot. But by linking this explicitly to some strange attempt at pressing for the UK to rejoin the EU you’re really just persisting in the contemptible reasoning you’ve been engaged in over the past 24 hours, using a humanitarian tragedy to shore up your own aims while misrepresenting others.