Current Affairs Belarus…and migrants…..

Status
Not open for further replies.
Just seen one of them. 24 yo Iraqi girl. She was in Germany, doing well, judging from her attire...(Nov, 10)

Just why girl...

_121842373_mediaitem121842372.jpg

People are willing to take risks.

It’s like taking ecstasy when you were younger. Every Tom, Dick and Harry was telling you that you don’t know what you were putting in your body, and that some people die from taking pills.

But you did it anyway, why? Because you didn’t think it would happen to you. You acknowledged the risk but did it anyway, because you didn’t think it would happen to you.

Every person that has died from taking ‘ecstasy’ didn’t think it would happen to them.
 
People are willing to take risks.

It’s like taking ecstasy when you were younger. Every Tom, [Poor language removed] and Harry was telling you that you don’t know what you were putting in your body, and that some people die from taking pills.

But you did it anyway, why? Because you didn’t think it would happen to you. You acknowledged the risk but did it anyway, because you didn’t think it would happen to you.

Every person that has died from taking ‘ecstasy’ didn’t think it would happen to them.

I didnt take any Es for the reasons youve given.

Again though, taking a 'risk' is one thing.

Fleeing your country (supposedly) as an asylum seeker in fear of their lives shouldnt mean they suddenly want to travel further than they need to...

...let alone jump in a makeshift 'boat' and try to cross the channel.

Using your example...drug dealers where you live wanf fo kill you. Do you:

A: Move to somewhere far away where youre safe

B: Go to somewhere even further then take a bunch of random drugs youve never heard of and have no idea whats inside -- despite believing its extremely risky and you could die. Because while youre on your 'trip' (see what i did there) if you survive...youre now even further away.

What kind of nincompoop chooses B.
 
I'm intrigued.

Belarus authorities are at the very least turning a blind eye to the large number of people / migrants / asylum seekers attempting to cross the border with Poland, and we are told that people are dying in the attempt to cross the borders. Poland is attempting to secure it's border with Belarus and deny further entries... The general consensus among anyone I've spoken to about this is that Belarus is acting abominably.

France is doing the same re people attempting to cross the channel in circumstances that are certainly arguably as dangerous... So why is France not subject to the same criticism as Belarus?
 
I didnt take any Es for the reasons youve given.

Again though, taking a 'risk' is one thing.

Fleeing your country (supposedly) as an asylum seeker in fear of their lives shouldnt mean they suddenly want to travel further than they need to...

...let alone jump in a makeshift 'boat' and try to cross the channel.

Using your example...drug dealers where you live wanf fo kill you. Do you:

A: Move to somewhere far away where youre safe

B: Go to somewhere even further then take a bunch of random drugs youve never heard of and have no idea whats inside -- despite believing its extremely risky and you could die. Because while youre on your 'trip' (see what i did there) if you survive...youre now even further away.

What kind of nincompoop chooses B.

This is proper Partridge lol

Why would drug dealers want to kill the people they sell drugs to?

I think you need to stop reading the Daily Mail.

Anyway, comparing recreational drugs with why a refugee would go on a make shift boat shows that you have no grasp of the anything, really.
 
TBF its probably very difficult to do that - they won't be using their real names to the migrants, who will have incentives (fear and self-interest) not to talk to the cops anyway. Even the money might not be immediately traceable, though it probably does end up here.

'Illegal aliens' or whatever the politically correct term is these days are an extremely vulnerable population to these things. It's a shame it is more widely realized by the rest of the larger population.
 
I'm intrigued.

Belarus authorities are at the very least turning a blind eye to the large number of people / migrants / asylum seekers attempting to cross the border with Poland, and we are told that people are dying in the attempt to cross the borders. Poland is attempting to secure it's border with Belarus and deny further entries... The general consensus among anyone I've spoken to about this is that Belarus is acting abominably.

France is doing the same re people attempting to cross the channel in circumstances that are certainly arguably as dangerous... So why is France not subject to the same criticism as Belarus?

Isn't Belarus accused of flying the people in? Of propagating false information that they will be accepted into the EU via Poland?

I think France would have to fly in refugees from Doha or wherever then direct them to take boats from France to England for it to be a fair comparison in my opinion.
 
I'm intrigued.

Belarus authorities are at the very least turning a blind eye to the large number of people / migrants / asylum seekers attempting to cross the border with Poland, and we are told that people are dying in the attempt to cross the borders. Poland is attempting to secure it's border with Belarus and deny further entries... The general consensus among anyone I've spoken to about this is that Belarus is acting abominably.

France is doing the same re people attempting to cross the channel in circumstances that are certainly arguably as dangerous... So why is France not subject to the same criticism as Belarus?

I guess, collectively, everyone was happy to blame Belarus but here it's getting split between France and the UK - I've seen plenty of criticism of both
 
I didnt take any Es for the reasons youve given.

Again though, taking a 'risk' is one thing.

Fleeing your country (supposedly) as an asylum seeker in fear of their lives shouldnt mean they suddenly want to travel further than they need to...

...let alone jump in a makeshift 'boat' and try to cross the channel.

Using your example...drug dealers where you live wanf fo kill you. Do you:

A: Move to somewhere far away where youre safe

B: Go to somewhere even further then take a bunch of random drugs youve never heard of and have no idea whats inside -- despite believing its extremely risky and you could die. Because while youre on your 'trip' (see what i did there) if you survive...youre now even further away.

What kind of nincompoop chooses B.
Clueless… absolutely clueless ffs
 
I didnt take any Es for the reasons youve given.

Again though, taking a 'risk' is one thing.

Fleeing your country (supposedly) as an asylum seeker in fear of their lives shouldnt mean they suddenly want to travel further than they need to...

...let alone jump in a makeshift 'boat' and try to cross the channel.

Using your example...drug dealers where you live wanf fo kill you. Do you:

A: Move to somewhere far away where youre safe

B: Go to somewhere even further then take a bunch of random drugs youve never heard of and have no idea whats inside -- despite believing its extremely risky and you could die. Because while youre on your 'trip' (see what i did there) if you survive...youre now even further away.

What kind of nincompoop chooses B.

I’d agree that option A is safer than option B. But my point is more about human psychology and the fact that some people think risks are worth taking.

When these people pay six grand or whatever, they don’t think they’re paying six grand to die a miserable death in the English Channel. They think that they are paying six grand to safely reach the shores of the UK.

Am I correct in stating that most people crossing the channel don’t drown, and that the vast majority of those making the perilous journey arrive in England safe and well? If that’s the case, then that’s WHY people do it! It’s because they believe that they will reach England safely.

Nobody would pay six grand thinking that it will lead to their death. They clearly don’t think it will happen to them.
 
Isn't Belarus accused of flying the people in? Of propagating false information that they will be accepted into the EU via Poland?

I think France would have to fly in refugees from Doha or wherever then direct them to take boats from France to England for it to be a fair comparison in my opinion.
I have seen the accusations that Belarus has been flying them in. Personally, I'm inclined to suspect they're true. However, would we still consider Belarus at fault even if those specific accusations are false?

I suspect we would.
 
Ah yes, sad.
She looks to be from the financially well off.
Going to England why?
Who knows, likely family pressure or as has been suggested she speaks some English, little or no German.

Do you know she's financially well off because of some other reporting or do you have an extremely low bar for what constitutes being well off?
 
I have seen the accusations that Belarus has been flying them in. Personally, I'm inclined to suspect they're true. However, would we still consider Belarus at fault even if those specific accusations are false?

I suspect we would.

But that's not what happened or atleast how the west is going to treat it.

So it's not really the same thing.

Also what you're arguing for is like someone going and stopping a trespasser from leaving his property that he has been trying to get to leave and now with like one foot out the door, gone already he's gonna be like "hey there trespasser you get back here and you only trespass on my lawn".
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.

🛒 Visit Shop

Support Grand Old Team by checking out our latest Everton gear!
Back
Top