Immigration

[Tangled up in Blue]

You mean you believe them to be Illegal. It's never been tested.

As for some Israeli's being racist. You're right. As a country they're no better or worse than any other country. It would, however, be balanced of you to point out that Israelis also suffer a huge amount of racism from the entire Arab World.

See my edit.Some of the settlements are authorised.Many of them are not.That's a fact.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_settlement

It's certainly my opinion that none of them should ever have been built.

Your last point also has some merit,IMO.

 

[rigsby]

It would have been wiser to write probably a racist.

I know (from my own experience) that some Israelis are openly racist towards Arabs.

You however are talking about settlements of which many are unauthorised ie illegal.

Even the authorised ones should never have been built,IMO.

So do you think these so called unauthorised settlements, which are illegal, should be removed. If so, does that make you a racist.

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

So do you think these so called unauthorised settlements, which are illegal, should be removed. If so, does that make you a racist.

Yes.

No,I don't think so.Perhaps you do and can explain why?

(PS Why aren't you at Oldham? My DB mate goes to all our away games).

 

[rigsby]

Yes.

No,I don't think so.Perhaps you do and can explain why?

(PS Why aren't you at Oldham? My DB mate goes to all our away games).

Just to be clear I think your saying illegal settlements should be removed and no that would not be racist to take such action

PS I refused my free tickets at Oldham (I would still spend money at their ground) because of their attitude towards our fans.

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

Just to be clear I think your saying illegal settlements should be removed and no that would not be racist to take such action

PS I refused my free tickets at Oldham (I would still spend money at their ground) because of their attitude towards our fans.

Feel free to complain about my post.I have no intention of changing the wording.Although LB is right to say their legality has never been "tested".

(Like your ps btw).:thumbsup:

 

[rigsby]

Feel free to complain about my post.I have no intention of changing the wording.

(Like your ps btw).:thumbsup:

I'm not complaining, just don't want to put words in your mouth. For what its worth I don't think its racist to want to remove illegal settlements.

PS cracking game at Oldham 5-2

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

I'm not complaining, just don't want to put words in your mouth. For what its worth I don't think its racist to want to remove illegal settlements.

PS cracking game at Oldham 5-2

That's what I gathered from your previous post.

Agreed.

PS.Say hello to RH for me on Saturday.:smiles:

 

[rigsby]

That's what I gathered from your previous post.

Agreed.

PS.Say hello to RH for me on Saturday.:smiles:

So what about Sangatte in Calais

PS who's RH. Anyone can go in the directors box. Platinum suite for a meal, Match only (with perks) £42?, or complimentary tickets from the club

 

[londonblue]

See my edit.Some of the settlements are authorised.Many of them are not.That's a fact.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_settlement

It's certainly my opinion that none of them should ever have been built.

Your last point also has some merit,IMO.

That doesn't make it a fact that they're illegal. It's never been tested in a court of law, until it is, your opinion is just that: an opinion. Granted it's a widely held opinion, but it is still only an opinion.

If you want (which you won't) you should have a look on Google to find the Israeli view. Their logic is interesting, even if you don't agree with them.

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

So what about Sangatte in Calais

PS who's RH. Anyone can go in the directors box. Platinum suite for a meal, Match only (with perks) £42?, or complimentary tickets from the club

Don't think Sangatte really qualified as an illegal settlement as such.Overcrowded perhaps.:winking:

RH's first name is Ray.He has 3 season tickets in the DB.

 

[Benfleet A1]

I think you can take it as read that the "coloured" remark was an unintentional faux pas.:cricko:

Mea culpa.

If that keeps you warm at night then you stick to that line. Doesn't make it true though.

 

[mrsblue]

If that keeps you warm at night then you stick to that line. Doesn't make it true though.

Maybe Tangled uses coloured boys to sweep his chimney!

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

If that keeps you warm at night then you stick to that line. Doesn't make it true though.

Maybe Tangled uses coloured boys to sweep his chimney!

I see even that nice Hillary Clinton has been taken to task by the PC brigade for using the term "illegal immigrants" in a Q/A Facebook session.

Her "poor choice of words" rather puts my own "little domestic difficulty" into perspective.At least,IMO.


http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...dges-not-to-use-term-illegal-immigrants-again


Ps We don't have a chimney Mrs B ( though some of our neighbours do).:smile:

 

[mattitouk]

Didnt know on what thread to post (as there are many similar threads around the migration crisis, brexit etc.

Anyway, just seen on Sky news that the Danish goverment have just passed a law through parliment to confiscate the valuables of migrants coming into Denmark in order to help pay for their up-keep. I believe other countries have enforced this, such as Germany, Switzerland, the Netherlands.

Denmark have also increased migrants request for family re-unification to join them from 1 year to 3 years.

Also it has been reported that the EU have scrapped the free movement of the Schengen agreement for at least 2 years.


I understand that other countries also

 

[Bearded Shrimper]

the confiscating of valuables doesn't sit well with me to be honest. i can see the symbolic importance of having those being given help contributing something but it seems a bit dodgy to me

 

[mrsblue]

the confiscating of valuables doesn't sit well with me to be honest. i can see the symbolic importance of having those being given help contributing something but it seems a bit dodgy to me

Those Danes have a bloody cheek!

I mean asking for some type of compensation from the hordes entering Denmark is very bad.

Why can't they make every immigrant a multi billionaire whilst turning the country into a Muslim state is way beyond me.

 

[mattitouk]

I will be honest, this is my 1st post in the politics forum, my intent was only to share news... im starting to quickly regret it.

 

[mattitouk]

the confiscating of valuables doesn't sit well with me to be honest. i can see the symbolic importance of having those being given help contributing something but it seems a bit dodgy to me

To be fair, it's not as if the danes are tearing off gold and diamond wedding rings off their fingers upon entry, im guessing if they find luxury goods that a migrante shouldnt normally be carrying, say an x-box or some luxury goods that are non clothing etc?..

Ironically I read that money (no matter how large) if it's in their bank account, cant be touched. although cash in person over a certain amount can be.
Im left wondering, whats the point, other than a political detterent?.. but Germany has the same policy, as do other countries, so im sure it really wont help them balance the books, although the deterent about raising family re-unification to 3 years will do, im sure.

 

[OldBlueLady]

the confiscating of valuables doesn't sit well with me to be honest. i can see the symbolic importance of having those being given help contributing something but it seems a bit dodgy to me

Me neither. This whole debacle should have been thought through before allowing thousands of unverified migrants into Europe and certain places are no paying the price. Still they continue to stream through our various Channel pathways and no-one in France of Belgium is doing a damned thing about it.

 

[RHB]

How Europe manages the entry of refugees, and for that matter economic immigrants, is now a major issue for all the Governments involved, including the UK. Shutting our borders to all of them seems to be a favoured response from some posters on here, which is an option. Drip feed entry of some heavily vetted refugees is another and then at the other end of the spectrum is the open door approach. The latest controls introduced by some of our European neighbours, such as confiscation or extending the time before other family members can join feels like another sticky plaster response to me. But I don't really have a clue now what should happen next.

Is it now time to arbitrarily intervene in the countries that are at the root of the refugee exodus? I'm not a great advocate of that course of action, but I just don't see diplomatic action achieving much. By intervention, I mean doing it under the banner of the UN with a unified front from all those countries and alliances that are currently involved.