Suresh

Other than finding a new home for the ~40% of British exports that currently go to the EU.....

hedgehog

Right, well it looks like we are getting somewhere. Do I take it now that your only problem with what I am saying is that it will only apply to SOME of the criminal element? I hate to make assumptions about your position on the matter but it is still not entirely clear to me and, as you have previously stated in what I have now discovered to be a "counter-argument," my intellect is at a level somewhat below that sufficient to make tea.

Given the above assumption concerning your position, and I do appreciate that the assumption is entirely my own and that you may be better able to clarify your absolute position on the matter, would it then be fair to say that John Reid misled the country by giving the impression that he could remove criminals from amongst us when, in truth, he was legally tied such that he could remove only a proportion of those criminals? Do you not think that to be entirely truthful to the electorate, especially in the run up to a council election where European matters may have been at the forefront of the minds of some of the voting public, he should have pointed out that the circumstances were such that due to EU legislation he actually had no power at all to extend his sanctions to a proportion of the criminal element to which he was referring?

If I was being unreasonable by seeming to imply that Mr. Reid could not deport any criminals, and I believe this is a close reflection of your position, do you not think that Mr. Reid was being equally unreasonable by trying to imply to the electorate that he was in a position to deport all of the criminals who were causing them concern? This is certainly what anyone I have spoken to has taken from his words and I didn't see him use terms such as "some" or "a proportion" in respect to the number of criminals he was deporting in the quotes posted at the start of this thread. Under these circumstances do you not think that that it is you who is being unreasonable by expecting me, posting in a casual manner on an internet forum, to have a higher standard of openness, honesty, full disclosure of the facts, syntax, and integrity than a Government Minister speaking to an electorate in the run up to an election? Also, in view of how harsh your comments at times appear to me, though I now appreciate they were just forceful "counter-arguments," do you not think that Mr. Reid deserves equally harsh treatment and that he should be forced to resign for misleading the citizens of this country? If it is sauce for the goose then, I'm sure you will agree, it is sauce for the gander.

Given that the above is the case then I think we are in agreement that Mr. Reid certainly needed to be corrected and it was necessary to make it clear to all, as you have done in respect of my comments, that the statement could only ever apply to a proportion of the criminals. In the case of Mr. Reid the net result of this correction is that dangerous criminals will be left to wander the streets of the UK looking for their next victim. In the case of my comments the net result is that it has provided some entertainment to myself, and some others, on a slow day.

Thank you for keeping me right about your comments on both my intellect and now my maturity, previously I had not considered these comments in the light of being a "counter-argument" and this was undoubtedly a most serious oversight on my part. I suspect that your position on this matter may be similar to your position on selective quoting but, on a positive note, I'm learning fast and my intellect is improving with each post I read.

Leslie

I certainly agree with ditching this creeping federalisation that is going on in the manner that Jean Monnet advocated when the idea of a federal Europe was first thought of. He realised that most of us would object to that and said the answer was to keep creeping in legislation until they can suddenly say that it is almost complete so we all may as well comply.

A completely dishonest way of going about it so that they can defeat any real form of democracy when it comes to the people's wishes.

The worse bit is having to put up with our laws being made by that bunch of corrupt commissioners who have not been able to get their annual accounts approved by the auditors for the last ten years!

Ditch it I say and then go back to the EEC as was recommended to us by Heath who was also lying to us anyway since he knew exactly what the secret agenda was all about!

Les

hedgehog

It must be said that I agree Leslie, I am most uncomfortable with the situation where we appear to be sliding into a situation where we have little or no control over the state which controls us.

This specific example is very good as rather than inform the electorate that the EU had removed the power of the British people, through the vehicle of the Government, and courts to deal with some criminals this information was hidden from the electorate. It is especially interesting as this happened on the eve of an election and this would seem to indicate to me that the Government were of the view that it would be unacceptable to many people.

So, not only do we have commissioners who we didn't elect making our laws but we also have a Government that we did elect, and that should be acting in our interests, hiding this from us.

hedgehog

It would appear to me that the current government are still having problems with this and are still showing some reluctance to admit to the truth, in fact it seems like they have several versions of the truth and may not even be sure which one is the real truth.

I WANT ALL FOREIGN PRISONERS DEPORTED (BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN ALL)
BLAIR'S NEW PLEDGE
By Oonagh Blackman Political Editor
TONY Blair threatened to get tough on the deportation fiasco yesterday but immediately backtracked on a pledge to kick out all foreign prisoners.

One of the PM's aides said: "Tony Blair wants all foreign prisoners deported - and that means all - unless someone has a very specific threat against them that they will be killed or tortured if they are returned to another country."

He added: "Too often the system has taken the conditions in a country into account."

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/tm_obje...name_page.html

The Zohan

Blair really is a spineless waste of space, he cannot tell the truth or stick by anything he says. He make Alan Bast@rd look honest and straight up.

He is supposed to be the prime minister - about time he acted like it when he needed to and put the uk first and not just in front of his chum Bush.

If Blair wants a deterrent and not grey areas then he needs to show some backbone and guts and be brave enough to say - all foreign nationals including asylum seekers will be deported if they commit a crime. It is simple and leaves no room for argument or negotiation.

As for the European human rights bollox it is just that these days, introduced for the right reasons and twisted and abused by those who wish to lie cheat and deceive.

I do not care what happens to these people when they go back.
They came to the UK
We took them in
They had a choice and knew the rules.
They go and are responsible for their own destinies

It ain't rocket science or even clever just how it should be.

About time the UK stood up for itself and stopped being used as the dustbin of Europe and seen as rich pickings for the scumbags.

Blair - you should be ashamed of yourself, yet again you have let us down.

Bram

This is what happens when you let your country be run by lawyers.

I have often thought we must produce too many as to provide surplus to occupy our parliements! I have also often wondered why such a professional body of people continue to thrive in such employment where it is clearly evident they lack the two major needs to be MP, plain common sense and ability to do what the electorate want.

But again they do waffle good, never answer a question, so maybe hot air is their credential to be a MP, in this regard they do excel or is simply they not enough criminals to keep them occupied in courts?

unclebuck

Best not to think about it. It's too distressing. Until we get a proper party into power with the guts to grasp the nettle and expel these intruders it will only get worse. Wait until Romania joins the 'Federation' next year and all the Romani Gypsies migrate here.

hedgehog

The problem is which proper party? You can't possibly mean the Tories as they gave the police a pay rise to beat up striking miners and so started the police state which has gone on to target generally law abiding citizens rather than real criminals. They also appear to support many of the measures the current government are introducing to contol and monitor the citizens. Also their leader goes to work on a bike while his shoes travel by car and he goes to Norway to demonstrate that snow melts in the spring. The man is clearly a fruitcake and any attempt to rationalise his actions fails in the same way as an attempt to rationalise the actions of David Ike does.

I've no idea who the Lib Dems are but am aware that they have a fair stack of mad ideas as well.

Then we have the BNP. As a party they can have lots of very nice policies which appeal to us for the simple reason that they will never get to power and so they will never have to implement these ideas.

As I see it that is it, there isn't anyone to replace NL and I don't want NL either. All we have is a bunch of spin doctors each trying to be more PC than the other and each striving for more positive coverage on the TV news than the other. It isn't real life and it isn't what people such as myself want because we can see through it without even the need to think hard about it.

unclebuck

JTaylor