Your comments, your behaviour.
You want to stop the objection to racism. Why?
You want to leave the mothers and their children in refuge camps, to die or be further radicalised.
- Status
You want to stop the objection to racism. Why?
You want to leave the mothers and their children in refuge camps, to die or be further radicalised.
Sponsored Links
S
sodthisforfun
Your answer is not fail safe though is it?
S
sodthisforfun
Where have i wanted to stop the objection to racism? Why are you unable to read posts properly? Where have I said I want to leave mothers and children in camps?
You have a real problem understanding that to object to your methods of dealing with racism (whereas I would rather engage and try to challenge), means that I am trying to stop people objecting at all. I just happen to have the view that your method is pointless and closes down discussion and therefore the chance to challenge.
You basically are saying that because I happen to disagree with your methods, that I am a racist. You've not a clue, not a clue and are very narrow-minded.
No, but it is working in NI.
Better to try something, especially when it looks like a responsible, civilised approach than to ignore it and hope it will fizzle out.
Sponsored Links
Like the circles in your mind , the windmills .....
Your consistent posts have been about trying to stop the exposure of and objecting to racism.
Your consistent argument was that the UK was doing the right thing by leaving Shemima Begum and the fate of her child, and all the rest of the unfortunate children, to the refugee camp to sort out.
S
sodthisforfun
That I agree, but this is a huge undertaking. And how practically do we start this? Radicalised members of a terrorist group (900 went from the UK to join ISIS) back on British soil at once, how do we start this? The home office has a responsibility to the UK citizens, we surely cannot allow that amount of people, and their children, back on British soil until they have been 'de-racalised'. Do we hold them in a camp in the UK? Silly comment I know, but how, practically, do we do this?
S
sodthisforfun
I will ignore your patronising part, again. I don't know why you always feel the necessity, unless it gives you a little thrill.
I think it's right to have stripped the mother of citizenship, yes. She is a member of ISIS and agrees with what they stand for, meaning she doesn't agree with what the UK stands for. Do we allow people like that back on British soil in the mindset that she is currently in? The fate of the child was down to the mother mainly, as the journo said, there was a lot she could've done before the baby was even born, but instead, being a true ISIS believer, she chose them over her child.
So in her instance, I think the UK has done the right thing. But that doesn't mean that I think any children should be left in a camp - but there is a real and difficult problem as to how to deal with this situation.
So was the channel tunnel.
We elect politicians that have the foresight to design and implement policies which we think are appropriate.
Then they decide. It's what we elect them to do.
S
sodthisforfun
So was going to the moon. However, neither of those things involved terrorists so another stupid comparison.
So if the politicians decide that their best policy is to leave all the ISIS members to sort themselves out, then you're ok with that? That's good to know.
My apologies for the patronising comment, but IMO you do go round in circles.
We disagree over Shemima Begum's treatment. My opinion is based on my approach to the children of such idiots that chose to go.
I suspect we could agree over a future policy and approach for dealing with the children of such idiots that chose to go there in the first place.
But we cannot implement a policy that treats the children in isolation. Indeed, we must not.
The NI approach is different because the evidence of violence and division remains, and the children though treated in isolation, are not removed from their parents.
The UK must have foreseen this problem, the reporter in your posted article raised the existence and potential of the problem. The government chose a policy of closing their eyes, hoping it would all go away.
Maybe they were preoccupied with something else.
I was simply comparing a large project. Just because it's a large and difficult undertaking, if it's necessary, we should not excuse ourselves because it's going to be difficult.
You know, and I know that that is a distortion of my view.So if the politicians decide that their best policy is to leave all the ISIS members to sort themselves out, then you're ok with that? That's good to know.
We have a bunch of totally inept and morally corrupt politicians in power. Yes they were elected, maybe some of the electorate were inept and morally corrupt.
Iran has jailed a humans rights lawyer for 38 years on trumped up charges
The Saudis are prosecuting 10 woman / girls for daring to protest about woman hot being allowed to drive month later law is changed
They are still in prison been tortured assaulted and sexually abused
All bussiness as usual by the mad mullahs
The Saudis are prosecuting 10 woman / girls for daring to protest about woman hot being allowed to drive month later law is changed
They are still in prison been tortured assaulted and sexually abused
All bussiness as usual by the mad mullahs
How is that remotely connected to the topic?
Perhaps the mods will see fit to delete your off-topic comment, just as they have seen fit to delete several of my topical responses to others' comments?
Notably, responses to yours and EFLimpudence's comments.
Somehow, I doubt it.
Perhaps the mods will see fit to delete your off-topic comment, just as they have seen fit to delete several of my topical responses to others' comments?
Notably, responses to yours and EFLimpudence's comments.
Somehow, I doubt it.
Last edited:
Of course it's related himagin
And please stop playing the victim card
Try acting like u have got a pair
- Status
Sponsored Links
