Belarus migrants

[12gauge82]

1 hour ago, djrwood said:

Fair enough, I just called it as I see it on this thread. I had assumed there was some history there, but I’m a relaxed visitor of PW so not fully aware of what else has gone on. I don’t know Henry any more than I know you!

All I would say is if you was in a personal environment in a group setting where someone you don’t agree with continually behaved in the way you believe Henry behaves, would you repeatedly try to engage/argue your point or would you not get to the point of ignore?

I think the former option is where you are at in this thread, which to me just sours the threads and reduces interaction with other members which isn’t great for the forum. Although reading a good spat every now and again is often entertaining for everyone else other than those having it!

No history with myself, but the guy constantly chucks snide remarks into people, in a way that implies they're stupid or he is somehow far more intelligent. Now if you were in a personal environment group setting, would you just sit there and watch him constantly do that to people or would you attempt to engage them in conversation to show him that perhaps people aren't as stupid as he assumes them to be? 

[henry d]

3 hours ago, JohnfromUK said:

Within the EU, the Dublin Regulation defines the procedure between EU member states.

Just to help you go to, number 4 HERE, but the rest is valid too.

3 hours ago, djrwood said:

You surprised Henry is ignoring your posts? You started with an insult calling him smug and then persist to try and bait him in to an argument with your fixed view on the topic.

A bit of understanding that not everyone thinks the same might go a long way….

I pressed the ignore button a long time ago.

[JohnfromUK]

5 minutes ago, henry d said:

Just to help you go to, number 4 HERE, but the rest is valid too.

I am not in need of help.  It is clear to me - in the EU, the Dublin Regulations apply.  Your quote is from Amnesty International - who are not exactly unbiased in this area reinforces that.  I quote from Point 4 as your reference above;

1. The EU does run a system – called the Dublin Regulations – which allows one EU country to require another to accept responsibility for an asylum claim where certain conditions apply.
2. The relevant conditions include that the person is shown to have previously entered that other EU country or made a claim there.
3. This is supposed to share responsibility for asylum claims more equitably among EU countries and discourage people moving on from one EU country to another.
4. But it doesn’t work.

In para 1 - it states the system - the Dublin Regulations and which allows one EU country to require another to accept responsibility for an asylum claim where certain conditions apply.  In para 2 it states "The relevant conditions include that the person is shown to have previously entered that other EU country"

Someone arriving in Poland from Somalia is very clearly entering Poland.  If they move on to France (just for example) - France can claim that they should have claimed asylum in Poland because "the person is shown to have previously entered that other EU country (namely Poland).

The fact that at para 4 Amnesty states "it doesn't work" doesn't mean that isn't what the rules say should be done.

To be quite clear and as a final thought (as we are clearly not in agreement, we will have to agree to disagree) - the British public and British Gov't do not wish to have a large flow of asylum seekers/refugees who have come via Belarus (under very questionable circumstances) via Poland and various other EU states.  

They then attempt to arrive in the UK by illegal means (boat across the channel, stowaway on a lorry/plane) or whatever means after having been right through the EU.

As I say - I don't want it, nor I believe do the majority of the public (who incidentally pick up the bills), or the present Gov't.  IF you believe differently, I will leave it as having to "agree to differ".

[Rewulf]

32 minutes ago, henry d said:

I pressed the ignore button a long time ago.

Edited November 11, 2021 by Rewulf

[12gauge82]

14 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

I am not in need of help.  It is clear to me - in the EU, the Dublin Regulations apply.  Your quote is from Amnesty International - who are not exactly unbiased in this area reinforces that.  I quote from Point 4 as your reference above;

1. The EU does run a system – called the Dublin Regulations – which allows one EU country to require another to accept responsibility for an asylum claim where certain conditions apply.
2. The relevant conditions include that the person is shown to have previously entered that other EU country or made a claim there.
3. This is supposed to share responsibility for asylum claims more equitably among EU countries and discourage people moving on from one EU country to another.
4. But it doesn’t work.

In para 1 - it states the system - the Dublin Regulations and which allows one EU country to require another to accept responsibility for an asylum claim where certain conditions apply.  In para 2 it states "The relevant conditions include that the person is shown to have previously entered that other EU country"

Someone arriving in Poland from Somalia is very clearly entering Poland.  If they move on to France (just for example) - France can claim that they should have claimed asylum in Poland because "the person is shown to have previously entered that other EU country (namely Poland).

The fact that at para 4 Amnesty states "it doesn't work" doesn't mean that isn't what the rules say should be done.

To be quite clear and as a final thought (as we are clearly not in agreement, we will have to agree to disagree) - the British public and British Gov't do not wish to have a large flow of asylum seekers/refugees who have come via Belarus (under very questionable circumstances) via Poland and various other EU states.  

They then attempt to arrive in the UK by illegal means (boat across the channel, stowaway on a lorry/plane) or whatever means after having been right through the EU.

As I say - I don't want it, nor I believe do the majority of the public (who incidentally pick up the bills), or the present Gov't.  IF you believe differently, I will leave it as having to "agree to differ".

Very well written, I knew the jest of it, but I've never seen the full workings explained like that before.

43 minutes ago, henry d said:

 

I pressed the ignore button a long time ago.

Yep, you ignore people who give reasoned logical debate as it doesn't fit with your delusions of grandeur! 

[Rewulf]

More err, evidence that Belarus is actually flying migrants into Minsk , from such places as Baghdad , Dubai, and various Turkish cities and Beirut.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/59233244

Calls for the blacklisting of Belarussian airlines have begun in the EU .

One might think that hordes of bedraggled migrants might raise some concerns in international airports, they obviously dont need any identification to pass through security ect ??
But EU officials are dogged in their belief that Putin is facilitating all this to de stabilise the EU , I presume that Merkels bid to do this in 2015 doesnt count 

No doubt a humanitarian crisis will be looming shortly as the winter starts to bite, and Poland starts to stock up on baton rounds and more razor wire.
But its ok because its all going to be Russias fault, and whilst we can all learn to hate them, we can still buy their cheap gas.

[ditchman]

and as soon as they get into the eu ...you just know which direction they will be guided,,,,,,😬😂

[Dave-G]

14 minutes ago, ditchman said:

and as soon as they get into the eu ...you just know which direction they will be guided,,,,,,😬😂

My thoughts too - EU doing all they can to screw the UK for the Brexit audacity.

[old man]

36 minutes ago, Dave-G said:

My thoughts too - EU doing all they can to screw the UK for the Brexit audacity.

Yes and it appears way past the time we should have acted constructively in our own interests but we never do, always giving in at the first spat like the weak kneed mob we have been forced to become? And I don't mean being over the top in any way.

[Rewulf]

It gets more and more interesting, 15000 Polish troops , plus thousands of police along the border.
Now they are talking about erecting a 'more permanent' wall along Polands 200 mile border with Belarus, that should keep the heathen out eh ?

They havent figured out whether they need to build a continuation of the Von der Leyen wall along the Baltic states 350 miles of border , or anything along Ukraines.
Well people in the leave camp always did say the EU had a protectionist policy , I just didnt consider they would build a wall all the way round it eventually 😄

Either way , this is a farce, a million or more migrants turned up at Frau Merkels invitation in 2015, and the Europeans were ecstatic that so many had turned up to pay their pensions for them (allegedly) whats a few thousand more going to do, destabilise the EU ?
If, and its a massive if , as in I dont believe it for a minute, this is a concerted effort to hurt the EU , dreamed up by Lukashenko and Putin in some kind of despot brain storming session.... A , Its a bit of a damp squib, you would need a 100,000 at least, and with numbers like that , it would be easy to prove the intent and transit.
B , Why dont they just call their bluff and let them in , say , yeah no problem , got any more ? Instead theyve made themselves look like nazis holding prisoners behind a wire.
C, Why are they seeing this as some kind of massive issue ? Thousands a week turn up from Turkey or Libya ? A thousand a day have been rolling up on Brighton seafront, and no one bats a bleeding eyelid !