Printable View
Oh my... Are you being ironic, or are you really that... Well... Ideological?Quote:
Originally Posted by Idaho
Who owns your house or apartment? Would I need the permission from you, if I wanted to get in there to stay?
Even if you were ok with that, would you be ok with it after I raped your sister or mother or something?
As you argue, that would just be an "administrative" issue, no?
Someone's showing a severe ignorance of the effects of unrestrained immigration.Quote:
Originally Posted by Idaho
The fact that you liken the situation to raping your sister is just bizzare.
And as for unrestrained immigration, that's plain nonsense.
You are presented with a problem of humanity and are responding like frightened chimps. Reacting in the most thoughtless, primal and fearful way. Being manipulated by scare stories and anecdotes rather than soberly evaluating the situation.
It was one generic example, and as I said, Africa is a very diverse continent. Wasn't Egypt more or less the first high culture that developed? Why did Europeans not overshadow the Egyptians at the time?Quote:
Originally Posted by Fragony
As for the debate Idaho started, there is a point to it. The borders in Europe work somewhat because they were created along lines people perceived as natural. Unfortunately that does not apply to the lines that the Europeans drew in Africa and the Middle East during colonial times, which just adds to the tension in these regions. Now you may complain that the Africans should just renegotiate these lines but then you may as well ask the US to renegotiate the border with Aztlán or all the people living in reservations if you think that's so easy.
I'm also not sure why the topic calls them illegal immigrants. If someone arrives in a European country and asks for asylum, he is not illegal but an asylum seeker until the validity of the request is determined. There are surely illegals here, but I haven't heard of any of them becoming rich or draining our welfare or getting free homes since you can't get any benefits if you're not registered. And at least for Germany the rate of rejected asylum requests is still somewhere around 50%, these people are sent back unless they can challenge the rejection in a court. There are actually people who check the validity of these requests and don't let people in who just want to be rich. May not be a foolproof process but some seem to think that we give everyone who arrives in Europe a car and a home. I know even people with a college education not from Africa, not criminal and very willing to learn the language, who seem to have a hard time staying in Germany legally.
Nope. De facto, the British government does that. The British government is in turn indirectly controlled (owned) by the British people, of which you are a representative.Quote:
Originally Posted by Idaho
You have chosen a legalistic interpretation but then have answered incorrectly. Britain is not owned by the British government. And I am not a representative of the British people.Quote:
Originally Posted by Viking
No idea what this is supposed to mean. You are suggesting that having empathy with other humans in desperate situations amounts to "high horse"? Strange. So I should be cruel, thoughtless, ignorant and reactionary?Quote:
Originally Posted by Greyblades
No. As explicitly specified, the interpretation was de facto, not de jure. Crudely speaking, the British government is the entity that by far has the most control over Britain and can handle it a lot like they want to, hence they own it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Idaho
It is to say that you are part of the aforementioned population, with voting rights.Quote:
And I am not a representative of the British people.
This is just nonsense. Sorry.Quote:
Originally Posted by Viking
Oh my...Quote:
Originally Posted by Idaho
I will just skip everything else and try to assist this individual. Nice guy as I am :)
Idaho, you have written a LOT of quite questionable content here... Would you mind re-starting this in a thread of your own, where you explain your world view?
I absolutely do not mean this as a diss, I am honestly interested in what you have to bring to the table, and right now it feels more like crumbs falling off of it..
So, if you wouldn't mind, I'd like to see a thread where you state your view on open immigration. That line of thought is raised here in Sweden a LOT, and I would love to actually have a sit-down with an honest representative :)
De Facto the British Government controls Britain, and we vote for the government (indirectly) when we vote for MP's.Quote:
Originally Posted by Idaho
I know you refuse to exercise your democratic rights on principle, but that's another topic.
Actually, De Jure the Queen owns Britain and it's Her Majesty's Government, so Viking is essentially correct whichever way you slice it.
What we're talking about here though is collective responsibility, the British, Swedish, German etc. people have collective responsibility for their countries and governments and part of that is the right and responsibility to restrict entry to the same for the good of the people at large.
In crude terms we don't usually allow convicted child murderers into the country because it's bad for the people here.
You and I live in a city of, what? 140,000 people now, of which thousands are recent immigrants from the Middle East and Pakistan, and by recent I mean the last decade or so. Well, Germany is projected to have something like seven times the population of our city enter this year as refugees, to say nothing of the "normal" influx of immigrants.
This is not just an "administrative" problem it's mass migration of a kind not seen in centuries, it's the sort of movement of people you have during the Hunnic invasions that toppled the Roman Empire, or the 30 years war, the sort of events which are associated with cataclysmic change on the continent.
That probably sounds utterly absurd to you, but if you had asked Flavius Stilicho in 395AD if he believed the WRE could collapse within a half century he would have told you that Rome had stood for a thousand yours and would stand for a thousand more.
International law dictates that they must ask asylum in the country they arive, if they don't than yes they are illegal immigrantsQuote:
Originally Posted by Husar
http://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-Ne...7691439911212/Quote:
Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla
7*140,000 = 980,000 <> 750,000.
The article also mentions that it's largely because other European countries do not come up to their duties. Maybe if they were properly distributed there'd be fewer ghettos and less impact on individual countries. Oh and 750,000 asylum seekers * ~0.5 acceptance rate = 375,000 who actually need to be housed somewhere more permanent and 375,000 people who are sent back. Even easier if actually fairly distributed across Europe.
Once again incorrect. Basic UK constitution lesson:Quote:
Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla
The country is ruled by the Crown, not the Queen. The Queen is a person, the Crown is a political construct. Neither the Queen nor the Crown "own" Britain. Britain is divided into lots of little chunks owned by landowners. Neither the Queen nor the Crown owns my house. Voting has no bearing whatsoever on ownership - you are both getting completely side-tracked and confused.
I don't believe open immigration is always a sound policy. But what are the actual numbers on the current situation? How many people are moving from where to where? Why are they leaving their current countries, and why do they want to come to western europe?Quote:
Originally Posted by Kadagar_AV
My suspicion is that:
- There are legitimate reasons (humanitarian, political and economic) why they are leaving their countries
- Often the reasons are to do with western european nations being complicit in destabilizing their countries
- The current levels of migration are nothing unusual in historical terms
- The situation is being hyped up by politicians, news channels and newspapers to generate a story
- More immigration is happening in poorer countries where the impact is higher than in western europe
- Western europeans are merrily travelling/moving around the world and will reject any controls on this
- The wealthy are benefiting most from immigration, and yet are orchestrating the hate from working people against immigrants
There you go - some targets to shoot at.
Aren't most of the immigrants young men looking for work, and not families fleeing persecution etc?
No, but I gather you want to have a monologue.Quote:
Originally Posted by Idaho
Too vague and generic to be meaningful - and out of context.Quote:
Originally Posted by Idaho
Some might. That would be their problem.Quote:
- Western europeans are merrily travelling/moving around the world and will reject any controls on this
Quote:
Originally Posted by Idaho
:laugh4:Quote:
I don't believe open immigration is always a sound policy.
So how many would you allow in? A thousand? Hundred thousand? A million? Ten million? A hundred million?
Please tell us, we are all ears!
We're just arguing because we know you're wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by Idaho
The Queen and the Crown are only separate so that they don't have to technically re-hire all the civil servants when the monarch dies.
Nah, the motivation is free money, they don't even bother to lie. Not all say that, but a lot doQuote:
Originally Posted by Rhyfelwyr
Many young Algerians try to leave Algeria for Europe by sea because they are...bored, apparently.
Risking death at sea to escape boredomQuote:
"Our harragas don't leave the country because they are poor or jobless…. even if that's what they say," he wrote in Le Quotidien d'Oran, the daily paper from Algeria's second largest city. "They leave because here, in this country, their lives are pointless, there's no room to dream, and worst of all, there's no fun, no laughter, no kissing, and no colour."
How would illegal immigrants get free money? Even as asylum seekers they get a bed, £17 a week in food vouchers and £10 cash for 3 years and are not permitted to work. If anyone wants to risk life and limb to live here in miserable and bored poverty, good luck to them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fragony
This is the problem. People basing opinions on opinions. Meaningless article.Quote:
Originally Posted by Viking
The tory's nightmare. 100 million darkies swarming at the border.Quote:
Originally Posted by InsaneApache
It's nonsense. The numbers are in the thousands, not millions.
!00,000 in Greece so far this year and increasingly more every week.Quote:
Originally Posted by Idaho
So now will you answer my question or dodge it again as lefties are wont to do. Ala 'darkies'.
At least a few hundred thousand a year. More from countries we've had a hand in screwing up.Quote:
Originally Posted by InsaneApache
I don't think you read the article. Algeria is not a particularly poor country.Quote:
Originally Posted by Idaho
Hysterical racist drivel. There has been no increase in the crime rate. But you aren't interested in the facts. They interfere with your narrative.Quote:
Originally Posted by Strike For The South
So?Quote:
Originally Posted by Viking