S
Scaramanga
Guest
Shall we have a thread on the EU sending asylum seekers back to Libya , oh wait they are allowed to infringe on peoples human rights, it’s just the UK that’s racist.
3 points -Shall we have a thread on the EU sending asylum seekers back to Libya , oh wait they are allowed to infringe on peoples human rights, it’s just the UK that’s racist.
Just to let you know that all the countries in the EU are sovereign states so can decide their own policies on a asylum seekers as we could when we were in the EU.Shall we have a thread on the EU sending asylum seekers back to Libya , oh wait they are allowed to infringe on peoples human rights, it’s just the UK that’s racist.
I’m not sure I’m getting your point, Scara. Whether either is right or wrong boils down to personal opinion, as far as I’m concerned they are both wrong. My point was that both are getting called out by the same humanitarian charities, so who are saying ‘it’s ok for the EU to do it but not the UK’?That’s great, so as I said, it’s ok for one country to do it but not another. You are basically saying just because some are saying the EU are wrong that It’s ok. They are still doing it. If it’s wrong then it’s wrong and should be pulled up wherever it happens. Horses for courses.
They should send them to Central Drive not central Africa. That would be more of a deterrent.Perhaps to give the impression that they are being tough on asylum seekers by sending them to Central Africa without really doing much of it?
I suppose if it keeps people out of the channel it will be deemed a success?
Merely pointing out that some have blinkers on (not you), and they are so one sided and turn a blind eye to others. Hypocrisy, and it boils my piss.I’m not sure I’m getting your point, Scara. Whether either is right or wrong boils down to personal opinion, as far as I’m concerned they are both wrong. My point was that both are getting called out by the same humanitarian charities, so who are saying ‘it’s ok for the EU to do it but not the UK’?
It’s obvious that we, as UK citizens, are more likely to be debating our own policy, than Italy’s, and again I’d point out that there’s a major difference between sending illegal immigrants back to their country of origin as opposed to selling them on to a 3rd party country.
Anyway, just my opinion, I had no intention of getting into an argument.
Now, now, Scara.Shall we have a thread on the EU sending asylum seekers back to Libya , oh wait they are allowed to infringe on peoples human rights, it’s just the UK that’s racist.
How will it do that?
The people who are coming here face a significant risk of drowning. A 0.5% chance of being sent to Rwanda will make no difference whatsoever.Only if it is seen as a deterrent, which would mean at least sending some I suppose?
Calm down dear, you'll burst a veinMerely pointing out that some have blinkers on (not you), and they are so one sided and turn a blind eye to others. Hypocrisy, and it boils my piss.
The people who are coming here face a significant risk of drowning. A 0.5% chance of being sent to Rwanda will make no difference whatsoever.
Red meat tossed to the frothers, it's very, very cynical. And as I said before, expect it to be kicked into the long grass when everyone has forgotten about it.
That piece of scum should be ignored. Stick to your top shelf trash Brady.So you pretend youre trying to stop the "evil people traffickers by intoducing a cruel policy of your own, as the Uk government.
So is this a West Ham policy ?
Karren Brady says Priti Patel deserves praise for her Rwanda asylum deal
New figures reveal just 172 of the 8,953 migrants who have made the crossing will be deported to Rwanda at a cost of £1 million per person.www.thelondoneconomic.com