PT We have now established that it was not because of his dental problem.. in spite of his sister stating this..He was not being persecuted or even threatened by his former torturers. He just wanted a better life in Europe...so he bundled his non swimming family into a leaking dinghy at night,twice.. only one life jacket apparently. They all perished as a result of his actions.The man was an economic migrant at this stage... not a war refugee.. and that was probably why his applications were refused...
No the Canadians have said his brothers application was refused because the paperwork was incomplete. His paperwork was not filed.
Which was another inconsistency, as he said he had applied. Either that or his sister said she'd applied for him when she hadn't, which I'm not inclined to believe.
Lets not assume at this stage that all who are mentioning immigration are anti-immigration.
I'm pro-migration and I'd (for once) mentioned it if polled. Quite frankly I'm curious about the 29% who don't think its an issue.
What does "pro-migration" mean? That you favour open borders and letting everyone in?
Common sense says that we should neither have zero immigration (none whatsoever) or open the doors to anyone who fancies it, yet this debate is so wrapped up in these extremes it's very difficult to have a sensible discussion about the right levels and numbers in between.
PT If having his teeth fixed anywhere but Turkey is not an issue..then why did he pay traffickers twice. ..to be given a leaking dinghy..twice.. and then put his family on board.. Must have been one hell of a toothache, which a qualified Turkish dentist could have probably fixed within an hour..
I don't know why he acted as he did. But, he deserves our sympathy. We all mistakes. Any one of our mistakes could have horrific consequences.
I think the frustration of other pb'ers on this is around the misrepresentation of the facts about this tragic case from which a mass emotional reaction has resulted and precipitated a rapid shift in government policy. There is no telling where that will end.
Rapid shifts in policy in response to emotional reactions to dramatic stories rarely turn out to be the right moves in the long run.
I'm probably out of the loop, not being in the UK - but has it really precipitated a dramatic shift in government policy?
Words may have been finessed, but I get the impression that deeds remain largely the same.
Provide money (possibly MORE THAN ALL OTHER EU COUNTRIES COMBINED- haven't done the sums, but we've been at least twice the size of the next biggest contributor, Germany, for several years, beaten only by that other 'doing nothing' country, the US) to give relief in the camps near Syria's borders. Notably several small EU countries have also dug deep (Belgium, Netherlands, but not 'socialist' France).
Secondly, not INCENTIVISE people smugglers like that idiot previously sensible Merkel, by specifically taking the vulnerable who could not hope to prosper by their own hands....
We'll never know why the UK public rated Cameron's handling of this crisis above Merkel's - but as so often on the big questions - they've got the answer right.
As to that tragic family, elevated to metaphor by a few photos - we all make bad choices, for misguided or poorly understood, least of all by ourselves, motives, but let us hope none of us face as such tragic consequences as they did.
If 'blame' is to be apportioned, step forward Western European politicians who have shown great compassion promoted people smuggling
PT We have now established that it was not because of his dental problem.. in spite of his sister stating this..He was not being persecuted or even threatened by his former torturers. He just wanted a better life in Europe...so he bundled his non swimming family into a leaking dinghy at night,twice.. only one life jacket apparently. They all perished as a result of his actions.The man was an economic migrant at this stage... not a war refugee.. and that was probably why his applications were refused...
No the Canadians have said his brothers application was refused because the paperwork was incomplete. His paperwork was not filed.
Which was another inconsistency, as he said he had applied. Either that or his sister said she'd applied for him when she hadn't, which I'm not inclined to believe.
Or the media misreported.
It was a direct quote in the Mirror piece.
That's where you've gone wrong. Now they can no longer hack phones, the Mirror's finding it harder to get direct quotes ...
Nothing's tall about them. I'm quite satisfied that yesterday showed fairly conclusively that Assad was responsible for the Sarin attacks on his own citizens in 2013.
Whereas your tinfoil-hattery was shown up for what it was: just blind, regurgitated pro-Putin propaganda.
Hahaha, wondered when you'd use 'tinfoil hat' - can we truly say you've scraped the barrel now, or are there further depths for you to plumb?
I never discussed the 'Sarin' attack on Assad yesterday, we discussed his so called chlorine attacks. I'm happy to discuss the former.
'Twenty-eight of the 36 victims – nearly four-fifths of the sample – said they had experienced loss of consciousness, according to the Sep. 16 U.N. report. The second most frequent symptom was difficulty breathing, which was reported by 22 of the 36, followed by blurred vision, which was suffered by 15 of them. But only five of the 36 reported miosis, or constricted pupils.
That fact is an indication that the exposure to Sarin was actually minimal or nonexistent for 31 of the 36, or 86 percent of the sample. Miosis is the most basic and reliable indicator of nerve gas poisoning, according to chemical weapons literature and specialists who analysed the report.'
Re-read the thread - it's obvious how it started, and what was being talked about.
Are there any depths you'll not plumb to back up Putin? How many people have to die before you think: "Hmmm, perhaps I'm doing wrong here?"
Your posting on this is pitiable. Steadfast refusal to argue the facts, just names, smears, and mawkish and totally unjustified claiming of the moral high ground.
I shouldn't even have to answer the last point, but I will. The best way that I, and increasingly others on PB, see to stop the bloodshed, is to reinstate Assad (tying him to democratic reforms that I'm sure he will be happy and relieved to put in place), and assist the Syrian Arab Army in clearing up the rest of the foreign-backed insurgency. The best solution your side of the argument seem to have is the brilliant wheeze of enlisting Al Nusra. http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/08/31/petraeus-use-al-qaeda-fighters-to-beat-isis.html
Which do you think will kill more people? Which do you think holds out the best hope for Syria? Which resulting state would you most like to live in?
PT If having his teeth fixed anywhere but Turkey is not an issue..then why did he pay traffickers twice. ..to be given a leaking dinghy..twice.. and then put his family on board.. Must have been one hell of a toothache, which a qualified Turkish dentist could have probably fixed within an hour..
I don't know why he acted as he did. But, he deserves our sympathy. We all mistakes. Any one of our mistakes could have horrific consequences.
I think the frustration of other pb'ers on this is around the misrepresentation of the facts about this tragic case from which a mass emotional reaction has resulted and precipitated a rapid shift in government policy. There is no telling where that will end.
Rapid shifts in policy in response to emotional reactions to dramatic stories rarely turn out to be the right moves in the long run.
I don't think government policy has shifted much. And the polling will reassure the government that twitter is a left wing echo chamber.
PT We have now established that it was not because of his dental problem.. in spite of his sister stating this..He was not being persecuted or even threatened by his former torturers. He just wanted a better life in Europe...so he bundled his non swimming family into a leaking dinghy at night,twice.. only one life jacket apparently. They all perished as a result of his actions.The man was an economic migrant at this stage... not a war refugee.. and that was probably why his applications were refused...
No the Canadians have said his brothers application was refused because the paperwork was incomplete. His paperwork was not filed.
Which was another inconsistency, as he said he had applied. Either that or his sister said she'd applied for him when she hadn't, which I'm not inclined to believe.
Or the media misreported.
It was a direct quote in the Mirror piece.
That's where you've gone wrong. Now they can no longer hack phones, the Mirror's finding it harder to get direct quotes ...
They didn't need to hack phones, it was a face to face interview.
PT If having his teeth fixed anywhere but Turkey is not an issue..then why did he pay traffickers twice. ..to be given a leaking dinghy..twice.. and then put his family on board.. Must have been one hell of a toothache, which a qualified Turkish dentist could have probably fixed within an hour..
Or its more complicated than only being about his teeth and he thought his family would have a better life in Europe?
For fscks sake. Most of the third world think their family would have a better life in Europe but have the decency to fill in a visa application. He applied for refugee status to the US and the UNHCR and was rejected by both, something unlike to happen if he was a victim of torture. Do we have anything other than his word to suggest he was a victim of torture? He applied for a visa to Canada which was being processed and was returned as incomplete not rejected as originally reported. He got impatient.
PT We have now established that it was not because of his dental problem.. in spite of his sister stating this..He was not being persecuted or even threatened by his former torturers. He just wanted a better life in Europe...so he bundled his non swimming family into a leaking dinghy at night,twice.. only one life jacket apparently. They all perished as a result of his actions.The man was an economic migrant at this stage... not a war refugee.. and that was probably why his applications were refused...
No the Canadians have said his brothers application was refused because the paperwork was incomplete. His paperwork was not filed.
Which was another inconsistency, as he said he had applied. Either that or his sister said she'd applied for him when she hadn't, which I'm not inclined to believe.
Or the media misreported.
It was a direct quote in the Mirror piece.
Canadian reports are saying she never said that. But obviously its beyond the realms of possibility for the Mirror to make a mistake/make a quote up.
When it comes to negotiation timing is so important. Having done a lot of preliminary spadework I finally asked the question of Herself while she was sitting replete and content after a damn good Sunday lunch cooked by me.
Anyway, I can go to Duxford for the airshow on Saturday 19th but, and this is the best bit, only if I travel by train and I stay overnight in Cambridge ("I am not having you travelling in the dark").
Result! Not only do I go to the airshow but I get a night on the pop.
Shall I buy a ticket for you? I was thinking maybe we could meet at the station from whence a bus will run to the airshow. Do let me know.
"T I've just been watching C4's It Was Alright In The 70s."
What it showed was how easily offended modern day media people are. It's a wonder they manage to go out anywhere, even nowadays, without recoiling in shock.
PT We have now established that it was not because of his dental problem.. in spite of his sister stating this..He was not being persecuted or even threatened by his former torturers. He just wanted a better life in Europe...so he bundled his non swimming family into a leaking dinghy at night,twice.. only one life jacket apparently. They all perished as a result of his actions.The man was an economic migrant at this stage... not a war refugee.. and that was probably why his applications were refused...
No the Canadians have said his brothers application was refused because the paperwork was incomplete. His paperwork was not filed.
Which was another inconsistency, as he said he had applied. Either that or his sister said she'd applied for him when she hadn't, which I'm not inclined to believe.
Or the media misreported.
It was a direct quote in the Mirror piece.
Canadian reports are saying she never said that. But obviously its beyond the realms of possibility for the Mirror to make a mistake/make a quote up.
PT We have now established that it was not because of his dental problem.. in spite of his sister stating this..He was not being persecuted or even threatened by his former torturers. He just wanted a better life in Europe...so he bundled his non swimming family into a leaking dinghy at night,twice.. only one life jacket apparently. They all perished as a result of his actions.The man was an economic migrant at this stage... not a war refugee.. and that was probably why his applications were refused...
No the Canadians have said his brothers application was refused because the paperwork was incomplete. His paperwork was not filed.
Which was another inconsistency, as he said he had applied. Either that or his sister said she'd applied for him when she hadn't, which I'm not inclined to believe.
Or the media misreported.
It was a direct quote in the Mirror piece.
Canadian reports are saying she never said that. But obviously its beyond the realms of possibility for the Mirror to make a mistake/make a quote up.
PT We have now established that it was not because of his dental problem.. in spite of his sister stating this..He was not being persecuted or even threatened by his former torturers. He just wanted a better life in Europe...so he bundled his non swimming family into a leaking dinghy at night,twice.. only one life jacket apparently. They all perished as a result of his actions.The man was an economic migrant at this stage... not a war refugee.. and that was probably why his applications were refused...
No the Canadians have said his brothers application was refused because the paperwork was incomplete. His paperwork was not filed.
Which was another inconsistency, as he said he had applied. Either that or his sister said she'd applied for him when she hadn't, which I'm not inclined to believe.
Or the media misreported.
It was a direct quote in the Mirror piece.
Canadian reports are saying she never said that. But obviously its beyond the realms of possibility for the Mirror to make a mistake/make a quote up.
Nothing's tall about them. I'm quite satisfied that yesterday showed fairly conclusively that Assad was responsible for the Sarin attacks on his own citizens in 2013.
Whereas your tinfoil-hattery was shown up for what it was: just blind, regurgitated pro-Putin propaganda.
Hahaha, wondered when you'd use 'tinfoil hat' - can we truly say you've scraped the barrel now, or are there further depths for you to plumb?
I never discussed the 'Sarin' attack on Assad yesterday, we discussed his so called chlorine attacks. I'm happy to discuss the former.
'Twenty-eight of the 36 victims – nearly four-fifths of the sample – said they had experienced loss of consciousness, according to the Sep. 16 U.N. report. The second most frequent symptom was difficulty breathing, which was reported by 22 of the 36, followed by blurred vision, which was suffered by 15 of them. But only five of the 36 reported miosis, or constricted pupils.
That fact is an indication that the exposure to Sarin was actually minimal or nonexistent for 31 of the 36, or 86 percent of the sample. Miosis is the most basic and reliable indicator of nerve gas poisoning, according to chemical weapons literature and specialists who analysed the report.'
Re-read the thread - it's obvious how it started, and what was being talked about.
Are there any depths you'll not plumb to back up Putin? How many people have to die before you think: "Hmmm, perhaps I'm doing wrong here?"
Your posting on this is pitiable. Steadfast refusal to argue the facts, just names, smears, and mawkish and totally unjustified claiming of the moral high ground.
(snip)
Which do you think will kill more people? Which do you think holds out the best hope for Syria? Which resulting state would you most like to live in?
I want the people of Syria to live in freedom from both the Assad regime and IS, both of whom have proved very willing to kill ordinary people.
Lets not assume at this stage that all who are mentioning immigration are anti-immigration.
I'm pro-migration and I'd (for once) mentioned it if polled. Quite frankly I'm curious about the 29% who don't think its an issue.
What does "pro-migration" mean? That you favour open borders and letting everyone in?
Common sense says that we should neither have zero immigration (none whatsoever) or open the doors to anyone who fancies it, yet this debate is so wrapped up in these extremes it's very difficult to have a sensible discussion about the right levels and numbers in between.
Primarily that I am OK with our current levels of migration but also I think our migration laws are too strict at the moment and should be made simpler. As an example my father in law is Scottish but lived in South Africa from childhood, got married there and brought up his three children there. My wife and her older sister moved to the UK a few years ago (on a British passport via her father). Her parents wanted to move to the UK but when they applied for a passport for the mother they were demanded to prove that it wasn't a marriage of convenience - which offended my father in law. He always bangs on about "thirty years of marriage and three daughters how b****y convenient". I'm sure they could have proceeded to jump through the hoops but they now live in Canada (and are now Canadian citizens). When we got married before they'd gained their Canadian citizenship we had to write a letter inviting her to come to our wedding and explaining that she'd be living with us for the few weeks she was over and the date she'd be leaving etc.
I've heard of other cases where people have taken years to jump through the hoops.
Comments
Common sense says that we should neither have zero immigration (none whatsoever) or open the doors to anyone who fancies it, yet this debate is so wrapped up in these extremes it's very difficult to have a sensible discussion about the right levels and numbers in between.
Words may have been finessed, but I get the impression that deeds remain largely the same.
Provide money (possibly MORE THAN ALL OTHER EU COUNTRIES COMBINED- haven't done the sums, but we've been at least twice the size of the next biggest contributor, Germany, for several years, beaten only by that other 'doing nothing' country, the US) to give relief in the camps near Syria's borders. Notably several small EU countries have also dug deep (Belgium, Netherlands, but not 'socialist' France).
Secondly, not INCENTIVISE people smugglers like that idiot previously sensible Merkel, by specifically taking the vulnerable who could not hope to prosper by their own hands....
We'll never know why the UK public rated Cameron's handling of this crisis above Merkel's - but as so often on the big questions - they've got the answer right.
As to that tragic family, elevated to metaphor by a few photos - we all make bad choices, for misguided or poorly understood, least of all by ourselves, motives, but let us hope none of us face as such tragic consequences as they did.
If 'blame' is to be apportioned, step forward Western European politicians who have shown great compassion promoted people smuggling
I shouldn't even have to answer the last point, but I will. The best way that I, and increasingly others on PB, see to stop the bloodshed, is to reinstate Assad (tying him to democratic reforms that I'm sure he will be happy and relieved to put in place), and assist the Syrian Arab Army in clearing up the rest of the foreign-backed insurgency. The best solution your side of the argument seem to have is the brilliant wheeze of enlisting Al Nusra.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/08/31/petraeus-use-al-qaeda-fighters-to-beat-isis.html
Which do you think will kill more people? Which do you think holds out the best hope for Syria? Which resulting state would you most like to live in?
New Thread New Thread
When it comes to negotiation timing is so important. Having done a lot of preliminary spadework I finally asked the question of Herself while she was sitting replete and content after a damn good Sunday lunch cooked by me.
Anyway, I can go to Duxford for the airshow on Saturday 19th but, and this is the best bit, only if I travel by train and I stay overnight in Cambridge ("I am not having you travelling in the dark").
Result! Not only do I go to the airshow but I get a night on the pop.
Shall I buy a ticket for you? I was thinking maybe we could meet at the station from whence a bus will run to the airshow. Do let me know.
"T I've just been watching C4's It Was Alright In The 70s."
What it showed was how easily offended modern day media people are. It's a wonder they manage to go out anywhere, even nowadays, without recoiling in shock.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/dad-drowned-syrian-boy-aylan-6376651
“I tried to seek asylum in Canada but my application was rejected."
I've heard of other cases where people have taken years to jump through the hoops.