The Student Room Group

Scroll to see replies

Reply 100
Original post by generallee
There wouldn't be a complete diplomatic meltdown. And who cares what the UN, run by a bunch of corrupt dictators, thinks? We don't have to take any refugees from the Middle East. We are doing all of this out of the goodness of our hearts.


Goodness of our hearts? Surely you don't believe that nonsense? We take in refugees because it is expected, and to maintain good diplomatic relations, as well as be seen as the "good guys".

Original post by generallee
What I find instructive is how you think it is "blatant discrimination" to rescue Christians who are being persecuted. Don't you care about them? Why not?


The main discrimination is flat-out banning any refugees who happen to pray to a certain god, rather than considering criteria that are more, well, real. Like whether they're going to die or not.

Original post by generallee
Do you have any idea what is happening to Christians in the Middle East? What so shocked us in Normandy is sadly a familiar event in Iraq and Syria.


Sadly I do, but they don't hold a monopoly on horror.
Original post by Dez



The main discrimination is flat-out banning any refugees who happen to pray to a certain god, rather than considering criteria that are more, well, real. Like whether they're going to die or not.
.

I am arguing that we take in Christians that are going to die.

Muslim countries can take in the Muslims who are going to die. Oh, wait...

Original post by Dez


Sadly I do, but they don't hold a monopoly on horror.


Only Muslims count it seems. I thought as much.

Are you a Muslim yourself?
Reply 102
Original post by generallee
I am arguing that we take in Christians that are going to die.

Muslim countries can take in the Muslims who are going to die. Oh, wait...


Yes, you've already said that. As I've already said, it would be a diplomatic disaster. Let's not run around in circles.

Original post by generallee
Only Muslims count it seems. I thought as much.


You're twisting my words and making things up. Again.

Original post by generallee
Are you a Muslim yourself?


Do you also want to know what colour underwear I have while we're at it?
Tbh if i was fleeing a warzone , at first i'd be grateful but i think once they regain a sense of security they would like to move somewhere more lively lol
Original post by Inexorably
Y'know for people that normally advocate for freedom of expression, you right-wingers are really hypocritical sometimes.

We want freedom of expression!*

*For white non-immigrants only, how dare anyone else ever express an opinion... inferior scum!!! -roll eyes-


You're being something of a hysterical manchild. Part of OP's freedom of expression is the right to criticise the things other people have said, it's not as if he's said they should all be crucified for speaking out.
Original post by Dez



Do you also want to know what colour underwear I have while we're at it?


It's relevant.

If you are a Muslim one could respect your desire to help your co-religionists (whilst fighting against it of course) which is only the same as my own view, after all.

If you are not, and are just yet another PC, Muslim cuck, destroying the country, then one can't respect your views.

No doubt you will get your Mod mates to delete this post. That is fine. I enjoyed writing it! :biggrin:
Original post by Dez


Being critical is one thing, bombarding them with hate is quite another. In this very thread several posters have advocated bombing their homes. Does that seem right to you?


So a couple of comments from trolls amongst a majority of reasonable criticisms have resulted in these people being "marginalised" and "forced to live as outcasts"?
Hey SCD, you haven't addressed my point yet, and explained whether you lied or got it wrong?
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by generallee
I am arguing that we take in Christians that are going to die.

Muslim countries can take in the Muslims who are going to die. Oh, wait...


Only Muslims count it seems. I thought as much.

Are you a Muslim yourself?


There is no distinction based on religion as to whose asylum claims will be heard.
Muslim countries take in plenty of refugees.
Original post by 999tigger
There is no distinction based on religion as to whose asylum claims will be heard.
Muslim countries take in plenty of refugees.


Only the bordering states, Turkey, Jordan, who have no choice, they are just crossing the border.

Not the rich ones. How many have Saudi Arabia taken in? The UAE?

As for their being no distinction based on religion which asylum seekers do you think Israel favours? Muslims or Jews?

The Jews look after their own. So should we.

Or maybe you are a Muslim and already are?
Original post by generallee
Only the bordering states, Turkey, Jordan, who have no choice, they are just crossing the border.

Not the rich ones. How many have Saudi Arabia taken in? The UAE?

As for their being no distinction based on religion which asylum seekers do you think Israel favours? Muslims or Jews?

The Jews look after their own. So should we.

Or maybe you are a Muslim and already are?


So nice to see you agree that Muslim countries do indeed take in many millions of refugees and in much greater numbers than Europe or the UK.

Israel is a signatory of the convention just like many other countries.

I liked your grasp at the end at me being a muslim as though they could be the only ones to challenge your views. bext you will be talking about brown people and pure bloods.
Original post by 999tigger


Israel is a signatory of the convention just like many other countries.

I presume you know that we only have to consider asylum cases, according to the convention you cite, if they are made on our territory.

Israel doesn't allow possible Muslim asylum seekers in (if at all possible) so then they are not bound by its terms.

Meanwhile they encourage immigration from Jews being persecuted (mostly by Muslims, see any pattern here?) elsewhere in the world.

http://jpupdates.com/2016/07/21/nearly-150-french-jews-arrive-in-israel-as-part-of-immigration-push/

We should do the same. Why we are voluntarily accepting twenty thousand thousand in, (almost all Muslims) in addition to the thousands who are just jumping on the back of a lorry I have no idea.

Not enough Muslims here, I guess. The more the merrier and all that.
Original post by 999tigger

I liked your grasp at the end at me being a muslim as though they could be the only ones to challenge your views. bext you will be talking about brown people and pure bloods.


Ah the good old race card.

You have no answer to my arguments. You don't explain why we should favour the Muslims who are persecuting Christians in the Middle East, rather than the Christians who are being persecuted by them. You don't explain why it is anything but insane to be importing tens of thousands more Muslims (plus their kith and kin who will follow) when the whole of western Europe is at war with Islamism. Why when we are unable to successfully integrate the millions we already have we should make the problem even worse by accepting more (at our expense by the way).

All you can do is to accuse me of racism for pointing out these uncomfortable truths that people like you can't bear to face up. (Assuming you aren't a Muslim yourself, and like I say I could respect your point of view at least, if you were).

The total intellectual bankruptcy of liberalism, is revealed in your post.

People aren't listening to you any more. Look around Europe. We are sick of you. We despise you. My point of view is in the ascendant, and gaining ground with each new outrage.
Original post by 999tigger
Israel is a signatory of the convention just like many other countries

Yes. But Israel didn't sign suicide convention. :cool:
Original post by admonit
Yes. But Israel didn't sign suicide convention. :cool:



It ratified the 1951 Convention on 1 Oct 1954 and acceded to the 67 protocol on 4 June 1968.1
Original post by 999tigger
It ratified the 1951 Convention on 1 Oct 1954 and acceded to the 67 protocol on 4 June 1968.1

You didn't understand. Applying the Convention to Muslim refugees means suicide for Israel.
Original post by admonit
You didn't understand. Applying the Convention to Muslim refugees means suicide for Israel.


Your post was rather weird. Israel doesnt have a problem because funnily enough muslims dont claim asylum there.
Original post by 999tigger
Your post was rather weird. Israel doesnt have a problem because funnily enough muslims dont claim asylum there.

Tens of thousands of Muslim Africans already are in Israel seeking asylum.
Original post by admonit
Tens of thousands of Muslim Africans already are in Israel seeking asylum.


Oh you mean these Africans -
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illegal_immigration_from_Africa_to_Israel
I wasnt aware they were all muslims.
They should apply the treaty, they helped draft it. If they cant they should leave.
Its not exciting enough? Lol. They're living in a country with a roof over their heads,supplied with food and water, and clothes, and especially no bullets being fired at them. But no... its not exciting enough, lol. That's funny.
Original post by generallee


The total intellectual bankruptcy of liberalism, is revealed in your post.

People aren't listening to you any more. Look around Europe. We are sick of you. We despise you. My point of view is in the ascendant, and gaining ground with each new outrage.


I don't think it's just intellectual bankruptcy, or idiocy. Though that's bad enough. I have also become convinced as I lived through the Blair years, and neoliberal globalization, that there was some kind of turn in mentality to some death of normal human instincts and debate based on conscience, and a suicidal abandonment of the national interest as some embarrasing belief or obstacle to them.. It truly is a sociopathic mentality that seems to wish to divide and rule and have ordinary people living hellish lives.

All that counts is the global super rich, and everyone else being told whats best for them because of their meglomaniacal schemes. This is all aided by educated 'enlightened' middle class idiots who are often more oblivious than the people who see it more 'coarsely'(often the lower orders) or their puppetmasters, the rich and powerful. But I don't know, some would say it's misguided idealism, I say they are more devious than that.

The people are right to hate their political overlords, western Europe more than anyone. We have to show solidarity, and not tolerate the BS from the media or 'liberal'(though actually they believe in oppression) elites. No more civilizational suicide.


Don't know your view, but to me, that means no stupid, futile wars which will be endless, drain our resources, and cause more terror. It means a proper sense of our national interests and sealing our borders and not succumbing to PC. That doesn't mean we should start being uncivilised or making things worse in the UK, we need to make cohesion as best we can, not to divide.


This is now damage limitation thanks to our idiot politicians. The Blairites and neoliberals are still to this day talking of 'liberal interventions'(God what a joke) and now isolationism is bad. To hear Blair, that quote where he says we can't pull up the drawbridge, we must engage in the world, is just scary in hindsight. And our whole 'progressive' media bought it. It makes us no.1 target. Jesus, will they discover any sense and start dealing with our own crises and ending foreign escapades? I hope so.

What they have done to this jewel of a country....

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/5177/no-go-zones-britain

This bit just says it all....and we are told there are no double standards, there will be equal tolerance for all communities...

Less than one month later, however, two Christian preachers were threatened with arrest for committing a "hate crime" after they handed out gospel leaflets in Alum Rock, a predominantly Muslim area of Birmingham. One of the preachers, Joseph Abraham, said:

"I couldn't believe this was happening in Britain. The Bishop of Rochester was criticized by the Church of England recently when he said there were no-go areas in Britain but he was right; there are certainly no-go areas for Christians who want to share the gospel."


The other preacher, Arthur Cunningham, said:

"He [the police officer] said we were in a Muslim area and were not allowed to spread our Christian message. He said we were committing a hate crime by telling the youths to leave Islam and said that he was going to take us to the police station."
(edited 7 years ago)