There's no law which says Europe or any country has to take in economic migrants.
I migrated legally under a government program thank you.
I migrated legally under a government program thank you.
Fuck Israel
There isn't, but there are laws which prohibit unilateral deportations, which is a form of human trafficking really. That too is illegal Dilbert. Illegal migration goes both ways, we can't force other countries to accept people who are not citizens of those countries.Dilbert_X wrote:
There's no law which says Europe or any country has to take in economic migrants.
I migrated legally under a government program thank you.
Last edited by Larssen (2020-11-09 03:19:47)
Thats exactly what the EU court did to Britain repeatedly, it pissed people off.Larssen wrote:
we can't force other countries to accept people who are not citizens of those countries.
So once again, the richer African nations allow free migration from the poorer ones, don't they?Dilbert_X wrote:
How is the African Union working out? Are African nations allowing free movement between them?
Ehm well the UK agreed in being part of the EU that ECJ rulings will be followed. So IF that happened, and I doubt it would be more than a handful of cases, that's what the UK agreed to when it joined the EU. Just like a national court overruling a regional one...Dilbert_X wrote:
Thats exactly what the EU court did to Britain repeatedly, it pissed people off.Larssen wrote:
we can't force other countries to accept people who are not citizens of those countries.
Well those are procedural issues. Why does a refugee have to wait upwards of a year for the first ruling on his/her asylum request? It's not their fault the system is slow as shit.Dilbert_X wrote:
But the process can be spun out over decades and once they have a kid or two its essentially impossible to get rid of them.
Last edited by Larssen (2020-11-09 04:50:58)
African nations don't allow free movement but their states are too weak to enforce that. So there is a lot of 'free movement' regardless.Dilbert_X wrote:
So once again, the richer African nations allow free migration from the poorer ones, don't they?Dilbert_X wrote:
How is the African Union working out? Are African nations allowing free movement between them?
The South Africans freely share their gold and diamond wealth with Botswana don't they?
The Nigerians allow in as many Ghanaians in as want to come to share the benefits their oil wealth delivers don't they?
The African nations just want to be one big equal family, don't they?
Don't they?
This is complete BS dude. There are far more refugees in spain, greece and italy than ever arrived anywhere else in Europe. They too have been subjected to ECJ rulings.Dilbert_X wrote:
The first ruling is quick, there's an endless appeals process all the way up to the ECJ.
Funny how all the other EU countries don't take in migrants or give them benefits if they don't feel like it, but the ECJ rammed it down the throat of the British every time.
Well of course they don't, why would they?Larssen wrote:
African nations don't allow free movement
You're confusing free travel and free movement.Besides nobody here hates Schengen. I like the fact that I can get in a car and drive to France without having to wait at a border crossing for hours. It's also good for business, allowing trucks to drive from one country to the next with no delay whatsoever bar traffic jams. You like efficiency don't you, how many hours of time do you think the EU27 save their businesses by allowing free movement?
Get this, a guy who frequently quotes Qanon stuff asked me today what Qanon was. Where did they get it? Facebook? Fox? Trump? A case of how far-reaching stupid stuff can really be. Wow (concluding word for larsson's benefit).DesertFox- wrote:
It is a pitiable and cringe-inducing sight to watch the inevitable. Apparently the new Qanon prediction is something is gonna happen on the 14th to show how it was all part of the plan. I also worry about the snap back to reality. There's been a lot of talk from the armed nutjobs that I don't envy the Secret Service going forward.
As an aside, I did end up on Reason after being linked an article tonight and some of the writers aren't complete fools, but the comments section is hilarious. There's a very small number of prodigiously posting libertarians calling each other sockpuppets and everything leftist.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/09/us/p … etary.htmlDefense Secretary Mark T. Esper was fired by President Trump on Monday, the latest casualty in the president’s revolving door of top national security officials who fell on the wrong side of their boss.
Mr. Trump announced the decision on Twitter, saying in an abrupt post that Mr. Esper had been “terminated.”
Mr. Trump wrote on Twitter that he was appointing Christopher C. Miller, described by the president as the “highly respected” director of the National Counterterrorism Center, to be acting defense secretary. He will be the fourth man to lead the Pentagon under Mr. Trump, who made a point of noting that Mr. Miller has been approved by the Senate already.
Mr. Miller is a former Army Green Beret who previously served as the top counterterrorism policy official in the Trump White House’s National Security Council.
Mr. Esper’s downfall had been expected for months, after he took the rare step in June of disagreeing publicly with Mr. Trump and saying that active-duty military troops should not be sent to control the wave of protests in American cities. The president, who had threatened to use the Insurrection Act to do exactly that, was furious, officials said.