LeMaquis Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 On the basis that we should have better control over who comes into the country and who we can deport. Like the USA had at the time of September 11th? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 The thing that seals it for me is that the USA with its over-bearing security and stringent entry criteria still allowed in terrorists who even learned in the US to fly the planes they used for the attacks. Well, people might say that the US is safer now because security is tighter. Then you have to look at San Bernardino.... I don't think we would be safer. If we were free from the EU we may be inclined to participate in more wars that have s radicalising impact. And our new inward looking stance could make us a less tolerant society and lead to more radicalisation. Bottom line is it isn't the EU that puts us at risk. We are at risk in or out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L00b Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 (edited) I was just listening to Dr Chrisopher Phillips speaking on Radio 4. He states that if Britain leaves the EU it will become safer from terrorists. I understand others in parliament have voiced similar things. The UK has never been in Schengen, ID/passport is always checked on entry, so in or out will make not a blind bit of difference to the current entry-checking procedure: it would just be the checks currently applied to non-EU travellers coming into the UK, applied to all regardless. I don't expect it would be hard for an EU national to get a tourist visa into the UK post-Brexit. Besides, going by the factual evidence in Europe so far, the terrorist problem is exclusively home-grown: British, French, Belgian, Dutch, Danish <etc> kids gone to train in Syria/Iraq as cell formers and trainers and returned home since Summer 2015 (std force-multiplying and operational safety 101: train one local guy who then goes home, forms local cell(s) and trains cell members locally). Usual baseless scaremongering from the Brexit camp, nothing new here, move along. Edited March 24, 2016 by L00b Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gamston Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 The UK has never been in Schengen, ID/passport is always checked on entry, so in or out will make not a blind bit of difference to the current entry-checking procedure: it would just be the checks currently applied to non-EU travellers coming into the UK, applied to all regardless. I don't expect it would be hard for an EU national to get a tourist visa into the UK post-Brexit. Besides, going by the factual evidence in Europe so far, the terrorist problem is exclusively home-grown: British, French, Belgian, Dutch, Danish <etc> kids gone to train in Syria/Iraq as cell formers and trainers and returned home since Summer 2015 (std force-multiplying and operational safety 101: train one local guy who then goes home, forms local cell(s) and trains cell members locally). Usual baseless scaremongering from the Brexit camp, nothing new here, move along. Both camps are guilty of scaremongering. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L00b Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 Both camps are guilty of scaremongering.Indeed. But the OP refers to a Brexit scenario. I didn't argue that "staying in" would make the UK safer: I'm just balancing the debate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Berberis Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 (edited) Oh I see it means ditching the convention on human rights. Go Britain. It doesn't, but if you want to get technical with the law, refugees are required to claim asylum in the first safe country they enter. Those waiting in Calais have travelled through 10-20 safe countries. As soon as these people leave safety they are shopping for which country will provide them with the best lifestyle. Edited March 24, 2016 by Berberis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sutty27 Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 Because the Turkish borders are really keeping them safe. Perhaps Turkey is a bad example. Because the Russian borders are really keeping them safe. Perhaps Russia is a bad example. Because the US borders are really keeping them safe. Perhaps the US is a bad example. Because the Chinese borders are really keeping them safe. Perhaps China is a bad example. Because the Indonesian borders are really keeping them safe. Perhaps Indonesia is a bad example. Because the... Well, I think you get the point. People have this stupid blind faith in borders. If people want to come into a country illegally there is nothing you can do. Have a look at Ross Kemp's (upcoming?) documentary on illegal immigration. Add: The UK already runs its own borders, allegedly nobody can come into the UK without having passport checks etc. Except for the Irish. Which is funny in light of Super Hans' statement. The UK-Ireland border treaty is bi-lateral and nothing to do with the EU. Your point is that you don't know what you are talking about. ---------- Post added 24-03-2016 at 09:41 ---------- Like the USA had at the time of September 11th? Locking your house door will stop some burgles but not all burglars, the fact you can't stop the most determined one doesn't change the fact that locking the doors stops some. ---------- Post added 24-03-2016 at 09:43 ---------- The thing that seals it for me is that the USA with its over-bearing security and stringent entry criteria still allowed in terrorists who even learned in the US to fly the planes they used for the attacks. Well, people might say that the US is safer now because security is tighter. Then you have to look at San Bernardino.... I don't think we would be safer. If we were free from the EU we may be inclined to participate in more wars that have s radicalising impact. And our new inward looking stance could make us a less tolerant society and lead to more radicalisation. Bottom line is it isn't the EU that puts us at risk. We are at risk in or out. Correct, but the risk is higher if whilst we are in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tzijlstra Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 Your point is that you don't know what you are talking about. Care to explain how those countries' borders helped them be protected from terror attacks? Seems to me that you are the one not knowing what he is talking about. Oh wait, you do, you are just trying to cut me off by posting nonsense so you can continue your demagogy of fear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sutty27 Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 Care to explain how those countries' borders helped them be protected from terror attacks? Seems to me that you are the one not knowing what he is talking about. Oh wait, you do, you are just trying to cut me off by posting nonsense so you can continue your demagogy of fear. It stopped the terrorist that couldn't get into the country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tzijlstra Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 It stopped the terrorist that couldn't get into the country. They weren't very effective then, were they? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now