wednesday1 Posted December 21, 2010 Share Posted December 21, 2010 conrod's on record as opposing all asylum seekers. When he was asked if he would turn away Jewish refugees in WW2 he disappeared. Ah, lovely fella! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Berberis Posted December 21, 2010 Share Posted December 21, 2010 conrod's on record as opposing all asylum seekers. When he was asked if he would turn away Jewish refugees in WW2 he disappeared. Links to threads please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spindrift Posted December 21, 2010 Share Posted December 21, 2010 Deleted, thankfully. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conrod Posted December 21, 2010 Share Posted December 21, 2010 Can you? The EDL clearly have racist undertones. They are vehemently anti-muslim, yet they also attract a small number of members of our ethnic minority citizens. Why should that be? I've got a theory. Do you have one? Do get with the program - I said as much in the post you partly quoted. By all means share your theory with us, we'll be greatly privileged, but I'm more interested in benefiting from Wednesday1's wisdom on the matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spindrift Posted December 21, 2010 Share Posted December 21, 2010 Do get with the program - I said as much in the post you partly quoted. By all means share your theory with us, we'll be greatly privileged, but I'm more interested in benefiting from Wednesday1's wisdom on the matter. So, would you turn away jews fleeing the nazis? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conrod Posted December 21, 2010 Share Posted December 21, 2010 So, would you turn away jews fleeing the nazis?Try not to be so petulant, despite trade being quiet this time of year I have other things to do than answer your zealous postings and cannot spend every moment at the PC. conrod's on record as opposing all asylum seekers. That's right - I would turn away every single asylum seeker that has crossed a safe border to get to the UK, because by coming here, they PROVE that they are economic migrants, not asylum seekers. Show me an oppressed Irishman or Dutchman, and I’d have an open mind on his predicament. When he was asked if he would turn away Jewish refugees in WW2 he disappeared. I do believe that was answered. The answer was that this is 2010, not 1943; the world is a different place today, and we don’t have a militant dictatorship trying to take over Europe and causing suffering on our doorsteps as we did then, so the example doesn’t compare to our current problem. If you must (I suspect you will) continue to be pedantic on the matter, my answer would be that I would have supported taking them in, because if they were in western Europe the nearest safe border for them would probably have been ours. And, before you ask, if your next question is would I have taken in asylum seekers from Fiji/Afghanistan/Timbuktu or China, the answer would be no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conrod Posted December 21, 2010 Share Posted December 21, 2010 Ah, lovely fella! Links to threads please.As ever Spindrift was rather - selective - in his memory of previous discussion, as I have reminded him above. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Berberis Posted December 21, 2010 Share Posted December 21, 2010 Deleted, thankfully. So you have no proof of your accusation? You could always use goggle to find the post like I did with tab1 and his infamous comments that I should be dealt with man to man. Comments he denied and accused me of being a liar too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spindrift Posted December 21, 2010 Share Posted December 21, 2010 Try not to be so petulant, despite trade being quiet this time of year I have other things to do than answer your zealous postings and cannot spend every moment at the PC. That's right - I would turn away every single asylum seeker that has crossed a safe border to get to the UK, because by coming here, they PROVE that they are economic migrants, not asylum seekers. Show me an oppressed Irishman or Dutchman, and I’d have an open mind on his predicament. I do believe that was answered. The answer was that this is 2010, not 1943; the world is a different place today, and we don’t have a militant dictatorship trying to take over Europe and causing suffering on our doorsteps as we did then, so the example doesn’t compare to our current problem. If you must (I suspect you will) continue to be pedantic on the matter, my answer would be that I would have supported taking them in, because if they were in western Europe the nearest safe border for them would probably have been ours. You think no military dictatorships exist in the 21st century? Besides, it's been explained to you ad nauseum that refugees don't have to seek refuge in the nearest country, although most do. There are countries in turmoil all over the world, you're very naive if you think military dictatorships stopped after WW2! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spindrift Posted December 21, 2010 Share Posted December 21, 2010 So you have no proof of your accusation? You could always use goggle to find the post like I did with tab1 and his infamous comments that I should be dealt with man to man. Comments he denied and accused me of being a liar too. Errr, he's just admitted it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.