Who are 'they'?
(i) illegal immigrants
(ii) foreigners who are HIV +ve
(iii) foreigners with AIDS
(iv) all the above
(v) all foreigners
(vi) all immigrants
(vii) anyone with AIDS
You don't seem too sure! (But that doesn't surprise me).
AIDS? - come to Britian.
- Thread starter joe-90
- Start date
Who are 'they'?
(i) illegal immigrants
(ii) foreigners who are HIV +ve
(iii) foreigners with AIDS
(iv) all the above
(v) all foreigners
(vi) all immigrants
(vii) anyone with AIDS
You don't seem too sure! (But that doesn't surprise me).
Sponsored Links
J
joinerjohn
I do wish people would bother to click the link Joe put up in the first post. For the sake of those who haven't , basically , the government are saying that the NHS are to offer free treatment to foreign nationals who have HIV.
I can see health tourism increasing drastically, if they go ahead with this ridiculous idea.
In the quote from the BBC website, I also see the words "Failed Asylum Seekers".
Surely if they are "Failed Asylum Seekers", they should have been deported as soon as they became "Failed" Or is that too much to expect?
.
I can see health tourism increasing drastically, if they go ahead with this ridiculous idea.
In the quote from the BBC website, I also see the words "Failed Asylum Seekers".
Surely if they are "Failed Asylum Seekers", they should have been deported as soon as they became "Failed" Or is that too much to expect?
Sponsored Links
No need to be abusive!
So, for the avoidance of confusion, you want to 'send back' anyone who tries to enter the UK who is a non-UK citizen (as in your post above), or just any non-UK citizen who has HIV/AIDS?
If the former,do we take it you would be happy to wreck the nation's tourist industry, the univeristies' main revenue stream and much of its international business at one blow?
If the latter, how would you know whether they have HIV or not?
Please answer the question.
And there's no need to be abusive just because someone points out the irrationanitty of your 'argument'!
And there's no need to be abusive just because someone points out the irrationanitty of your 'argument'!
No, you haven't. Please quote the post in which you answer the questions I have raised about
(i) which group(s) of people you wish to exclude from the UK
(ii) how you think you will be able to tell whether those people have HIV or not on entry
just because someone has a different point of view....doesnt necessarily make it irrational....thats the beauty of debate....if we all thought the same....GD would be a very fluffy place
- Joined
- 28 Oct 2005
- Messages
- 31,282
- Reaction score
- 1,998
- Country
I want to exclude illegal immigrants that have aids. When they are rounded up they should be deported aids or not.
I wouldn't give free treatment to anyone as it is an open invitation to come for free treatment. What would you do if you could get free treatment here but not at home?
Do you want free dental and abortions too?
I wouldn't give free treatment to anyone as it is an open invitation to come for free treatment. What would you do if you could get free treatment here but not at home?
Do you want free dental and abortions too?
A
Alarm
As above, if your not supposed to be here, sod off. If the appeal has failed its out that day. Non Gratis from then on. Other countries do it, time we did.
No insurance, basic treatment , sent home and billed for it. As happens to us when abroad, Break our laws, sod jail here, deported and jail in your own country.
Whilst at it, stop aid outside until we are sorted. One year of no external aid would sort out this country.
No bringing in families and then breeding more and more, unless YOU can afford it. No social housing to non born here with parents not born here. No passport until 3rd generation. As above get convicted, all the above revoked for all family members.
Notice, no race or skin colour mentioned. It applies to all.
No insurance, basic treatment , sent home and billed for it. As happens to us when abroad, Break our laws, sod jail here, deported and jail in your own country.
Whilst at it, stop aid outside until we are sorted. One year of no external aid would sort out this country.
No bringing in families and then breeding more and more, unless YOU can afford it. No social housing to non born here with parents not born here. No passport until 3rd generation. As above get convicted, all the above revoked for all family members.
Notice, no race or skin colour mentioned. It applies to all.
I am not asking Joe 90 (or anyone) to 'think the same', merely requesting that they refrain from tagging insults onto every response simply because they disagree/don't like having the flaws in their argument (such as it is) pointed out. He can (and will) think what he likes- rational argument is wasted on him, it seems! However, adding 'you dope' after every retort is hardly likely to add stature or gravitas to his viewpoint, is it? It just makes us think (but not publish, of course) 'What a rude b**tard!' or 'He's losing the argument, there'.
You are correct in that having a different viewpoint from someone else doesn't necessarily make yours a more rational one, but in this case, actually, it does. If you disagree with me on that, perhaps you would like to read/re-read the whole thread and explain why my exposé of the fundamental flaws in Joe's argument is irrational. If you cannot do that, then I suggest you concede.
Ha! You have just dug a very big pit and fallen right into it, Joe!
Read what you have just said and appreciate the senselessness of it.
Conversation over now - your 'contributions' to it are terminally dull, zenophobic, irrational and poorly expressed - I have had better debates with 13 year olds! No doubt you'll grind on, Daily Fail style, for some time to come, but I will be doing something more interesting.
Best wishes to all, including those who disagree with me.
Sponsored Links
Similar threads
- joinerjohn
- General Discussion
