But they all told lies/they weren't in any position to actually, you know, 'do' anything (except be lying [Poor language removed] obviously)
Current Affairs The benefits of Brexit Page
- Thread starter JammyP
- Start date
- Status
But they all told lies/they weren't in any position to actually, you know, 'do' anything (except be lying [Poor language removed] obviously)
You monumental bellwhiff. She's saying that she has, for the last ten years, made Britain her home and contributed in a great many ways, both professionally and socially to her community, and some random [Poor language removed] head has said she, or people like her, shouldn't be permitted to live such a life because you have a phobia of people who happened to have been born somewhere else. [Poor language removed].
you’re running wild since you’ve handed in your gun and your badge mate , a cop gone rogue it’s like lethal weapon in here !
No doubt someone who wants to screw with people's lives will act all whiny and cry that someone was mean to him. Pfft.
I’ll be honest I like it mate .
that said damn it Bruce you’ve only got 24 hrs to solve the case .
Where have I said she doesn't have the right to live the life she wants? I have said she doesn't have any more right than anyone else to gain entry to a country, if she doesn't gain enough points. That's very different isn't.
How have you come to the conclusion that I have a phobia about people that are born elsewhere? Obviously because I disagree with you I must me an intolerant bigot - you know the kind that doesn't listen to anyone else's point and that resorts to insulting people....oh wait.
You don't have to waste your time responding mate. If you can't keep it civil, you are not worth my time. Just put me on ignore like that other clown.
Oh [Poor language removed], I can do that now.
I just believe that all immigration should be controlled - that includes the EU. I am not anti-immigration. Nor am I, judging by some of the responses, a racist bigot that has a phobia with regards to foreigners (I think that might be a xenophobe - so I got the three big ones there).
This may shock you - but in that referendum, I actually voted to remain. To be honest, I didn't really put a lot of thought into my vote. The EU was just something I had grown up with, so why change it. Thing is - the vote went the other way, and I couldn't really fathom why people could be so stupid to want to leave - so I started to look into it. I eventually came to the conclusion that I wanted us to leave (this did shock me a bit to be honest). It was irrelevant what I thought though - The simple fact is that we had to leave - the country voted. We are a democracy. That's how it works.
Something else crossed my mind though, and it was this:- If the country voted to leave the EU, but the final decision was left to the EU, would the EU let us leave? My conclusion to that was:- No. They wouldn't. This was what swayed me.
What I found to be an absolute disgrace though, was the abuse that was dished out by many people that didn't like the result of that referendum. Bigot, racist, little englander, xenophobe, gammon etc. It was shocking. Unfortunately - that is still happening. You can see from the responses in this forum, and from the other forums, that it is basically the default argument. Hardly anyone debates - they just shout you down. You haven't done that, and it is appreciated.
I think we should leave the EU, not because of immigration, but because we should be governed by people we ourselves have elected. We should be able to remove those people if they are failing us. This is not the case with the EU.
Alan Whittle
Player Valuation: £70m
Where exactly have you debated about this woman? You just moaned about her temerity to do good and played the victim when people pulled you up.
Is that what you got from that?
Also - I don't recall playing the victim at any point. People did not pull me up - they're not in a position to do that, they can disagree - that's it. I did admit that in hindsight that maybe my original posts were a little harsh. The point still stands though. I have not backed down from any of the points I have made.
What I did was point out how many of the posters - not all - are very quick to resort to personal insults, and really offer very little in the way of a debate. Have you not noticed the lack of insults coming from me towards anyone in this forum? That's what grown ups do. We don't resort to insults. We also don't make BS up with regards to what the other persons is saying, and what the other person actually did.
What I did was point out her virtue signalling to the world. I also pointed out that she had no right to expect any preferential treatment, just because she had a PhD. If she hasn't got the points to gain access to any country that demands it - not just the UK, then she should not gain access to that country. I mentioned in that first paragraph, that in hindsight my original posts were a little harsh. This is exactly what the situation is here with this woman. It's okay ten years down the line to make an argument about how scandalous it would have been to not let her into the country. Thing is - she didn't have those ten years of helping the disabled and elderly then. She was a woman with a PhD. In today's world, she wouldn't have been allowed access. And that is the correct decision.
Not one person has made a reasonable argument as to why this woman - based on what we know about her - should have been given preferential treatment ten years ago, if the immigration criteria was as it is now.
Alan Whittle
Player Valuation: £70m
That wasn't her argument, which you missed when you went straight to personal insults. Her point was that, perhaps, given her obvious ability to contribute to society, the mechanics of the points system may be wrong. Note that she didn't say that a points system was wrong in principle, just the way the current proposal is constructed. But, as you said, she is "entitled" "educated" " waving a PhD in someone's face". You also mentioned that if she "had a white van and a set of tools would anyone complain?" So, no skills required, just a van and a tool set. Let's just suppose you're views are not offensive (and I'm quite prepared to believe that no offence was intended) but that doesn't mean that they aren't entirely risible.
Or pay lip service to the problem and ultimately ignore it as them and their own can afford to go private. Wages won't rise when there is the option of simply letting standards slip.
Like researching cures for deadly diseases, looking after the homeless, emergency services and feeding the poor, the care of the elderly and vulnerable will simply fall into the category of charity once it is no longer profitable enough for the private sector.
I disagree mate. The only argument she put up was that she had a PhD (subject unknown). She didn't state whether she could speak the language, and she didn't state whether or not she had employment. So on that evidence, she has no right expecting admission to another country on the strength of what she is telling us. What happened after she gained access is not relevant. She has obviously - according to her tweet - contributed greatly to society, but those good deeds were in the future.
To me it really does reek of a sense of entitlement. We can disagree on that. No big deal.
With regards to my white van and a tool set remark - I was referring to a plumber or a mechanic. Someone with those skills, entering the country ten years ago may also have contributed greatly to society since gaining entry, but we shouldn't, in a points system, allow them access if all they have is a van and a tool kit. And someone should not be allowed into the country if all they have is a PhD. If neither gain enough points, then neither should be allowed access. The criteria is the same for everyone.
This is what bugs me a bit also - If I had moved to Spain ten years ago, and made a life for myself. If I had been good to Spain, and Spain had been good to me sort of thing - I don't think I would take to Twitter to tell Spain how lucky they were to have me and how they should be controlling their borders. I think I would just be happy I got in when I did. That's not me saying she should be eternally grateful etc, but it just seems a bit off to me.
Grim isn't it? Getting into a country, like its a prison. I was thinking earlier, had times been different, my missus wouldn't have been allowed to come here. She wouldn't have got a couple of degrees or spent ten years working in the NHS. She'd have not met me, or any of the other people whose lives she's impacted.
And why? Because she's someone that needs 'controlling'? Over whom someone in Whitehall believes they can sit in judgement as to her worth to this miserly shithole of a country?
And why? Because she's someone that needs 'controlling'? Over whom someone in Whitehall believes they can sit in judgement as to her worth to this miserly shithole of a country?
Tea_drinker
Player Valuation: £15m
That 'woman' who asked the first question on question time tonight. She's now publicly known as an idiot and a racist and I see that revealing as a plus.
- Status