Reply With QuoteWould you like an ice pack Jimbo?Originally Posted by JamesWales
| + Visit Cardiff FC for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results |
Still confused?And James Wales struggles up from the canvas for the fifteenth time in this thread, I suppose you’ve got to admire his resilience, but his corner really should throw the towel in now - failing that, maybe a moderator could step in to avoid him taking further punishment
What argument do you think you, or anyone else have won here?! Baffling!
Would you like an ice pack Jimbo?
It's warm today but no need for that!
My interpretation of this thread: A number of well argued and common sense proposals and points from a range of individuals who don't like the Government's policy but absolutely don't underestimate the problem, or complexity of the solution, and probably have quite diverse political standpoints, views and thoughts on the detail of how any mitigating policies are implemented.
How I assume James sees this thread (using some of his own words): The usual 'pile on' from the 'lefty angry mob'. Easiest just to parrot the Government line.
Anyway, I'm out. It's boring now.
From my perspective, it's a mixture of the two, Peter.
If I'm honest your posting history suggests otherwise. There is no evidence of any sense of openness (or still less, respect) to other ways of thinking in this thread.
Have you read what others have written? I, and others, get a shed load of abuse from a small number of people for having any alternative opinion and it does get ones back up.
Sorry, but I don't think I've seen a solution on here that stops criminal gangs and reduces numbers claiming asylum in the UK or does so without creating a greater number of issues elsewhere. I'm perfectly entitled to come to that conclusion.
And on page 1, before I even posted, we have:
"lefty lawyers" - Bob (admittedly using the term ironically, but still..)
"Slimy Tory" - Sludge
"Idiot" - Sludge
"Everything they touch turns to shit" - RJK.
They don't sound like particularly useful tone setters to a sensible discussion on a legionnaire's disease outbreak to me. I admit, I shouldn't assume that most left wing people who have strong opinions on such matters are generally privileged and insulated from such matters, although in my experience it is often true.
It would be great if we could have a genuinely open debate that isn't based on Disney politics.
double post
Alternative opinion?You just parrot Government policy. Tell us something alternative...
No I don't. And by alternative, I mean alternative to the prevailing wind on this messageboard boardAlternative opinion?
And in reposte you gave.
1. Comfortably off left-wingers far from the problem usually) will moan and moan and moan whatever happens.
2. you toxic lot!
3. Your naivity is quite somethng.
4. What I'm saying is that you are a middle class leftie who screams and moans and offers no solutions and uses other people as pawns in issues that you will never, ever, be impacted by.
5. It's just the angry crew reforming the band!
6. This is what I mean when I talk of a convenient naiivity on the left.
You did have an ironic kick out at Ad Hominems though.
Perhaps we should move on though. I mentioned Dublin III and you rightly pointed out that in the last year of the accord slightly more people were relocated to the UK than from it (though applications were higher the other way). This study, though soft left in my opinion, provides major evidence that before we left DIII small boats were statistically insignificant. Only when traffickers and the trafficked realised that the deterrent effect no longer exst did small boats increase exponentially.
https://www.durham.ac.uk/departments...r-thom-brooks/
We purposely excluded an agreement on maintaining a returns policy with the EU when we hastily negotiated the "oven ready" deal. Do you think that a future government trying to negotiate such a deal may have more benefit than exports to Africa or leaving internationally negotiated treaties?
Happy to personally apologise to anyone offended. It does get my back up that the default position is always one of division and 'black and white', but that is no excuse and I will try better.
Outbreaks of this kind do occur, unfortunately. It's almost as if it's not easy to find housing for x number of people arriving daily.
However, yes, good to move on. 👍
It absolutely is "black and white". There are no shades of grey. It amazes me an obviously fairly intelligent man cannot understand that.
https://youtu.be/CohnFb1tOUU
Suck on that
Go to bed
The game is over
I don't think you are supposed to take comedians so seriously Sludge. And no way was I going to go to bed at 7.24 when I had only just woken up. Ridiculous suggestion.
The thread could do with a long lie down, but just to perhaps leave it on some questions, it is black and white. And if it isn't, what part isn't?
Is the govt right to house people on barges?
Is the humanitarian process of asylum claims riddled with criminal abuse?
Is the positive test of legionella in one of hundreds of sites a sign of wider mismanagement?
Is the asylum process reaching those most in need or rewarding the fittest?
Should the UK house absolutely everyone who successfully applies for asylum here or are there limits?
Is it okay to be concerned for communities where people are housed?
Should asylum seekers receive housing over other people awaiting it?
Has leaving the EU made any difference?
Are current human rights laws fit for purpose?
Would the opposition do anything different?
There's an enormous amount of black and white issues in this debate. It's very very complex.
But apparently the "Only solution increasingly seems to involve leaving the ECHR if we are to have any control". Explain how the complexities of these issues are resolved by your solution and how the negative impacts on the Good Friday Agreement and the the Withdrawal Agreements with the EU can be mitigated. Then we can all join in and gaze in wonderment at the nuanced thinker you claim to be.
Calm down Cyril, I just left a series of ponderables in response to Dorcus saying the issue absolutely is 'black and white' when I would suggest that on any level of the debate, it absolutely is not.
Thanks for the advice. I mistakenly thought that by calling out every alternative offered in this thread as simplistic, half-baked, naive or lacking complexity that your solution of leaving the ECHR would suffer from none of those faults. No biggie!
Nothing is without its consequences, although I do think it would benefit the solution of this problem, but it's perfectly reasonable to present the idea that it may open up new challenges also
But still what? If I’d meant it like the snowflake Tories who use the term do, it would have been okay?
Just pointing out that you used the term first on this thread, all on page one, which perhaps helps set the tone for how these threads pan out?
But, all I was doing, albeit in an ironic manner, is repeating what Government Ministers and spokespeople (the people you defend on here as a reflex action) were saying. So, what is your point? Are you saying me pointing out an example of this Government’s tendency to blame someone else when anything goes wrong is the reason for the “but still what” or it’s wrong for the Government to apply lazy and simple generalisation to a complex problem?
I see the squatter in number 10 has moved the goalposts AGAIN!
Jan: I will Stop The Boats!
Feb: I will Stop The Boats!
Mar: I will Stop The Boats!
Apr: I will Stop The Boats!
May: I will Stop The Boats!
June: I will Stop The Boats!
July: I will Stop The Boats!
Aug: Well obviously I didn’t mean we would actually stop the boats…
https://x.com/itvnewspolitics/status...ZQyp-iO2wYo4Kg
Posting Permissions
