egg

You miss the point that Cherie was making and I was replying to. It had nothing to do with the Australian detention center point. It was about boats arriving, and being turned around. People got to Australia on boats capable of making it to Australia, hence they got there. They could then be turned around on the boats they arrived in, on the assumption they could return to where the started from. That's different to people leaving France on a dinghy that can't make it here, and being collected by our border force taxi service. Nobody is sending them back to sea on a dinghy that'll bobble about in the channel before failing. If the boat managed to make it here undamaged, so could make it back, that's a different story.

Given how far Australia is from anywhere, people presumably arrived on a boat that would actually make it to Australia, thus back where they departed. How does that compare with people arriving on dinghies that can't actually make it here, thus return to where they started?

Exactly. Labour have done pretty well in getting the legal migration numbers down in fairness, but there's a long way to go and it must be addressed. That said, the flag raisers solitary focus is illegal migration. Whilst I agree that the 95% should be the priority issue to address, there's more political currency in the 5%.

Indeed. If the expectation is that leaving will impact on illegal immigration, people are forgetting he UN Refugee Convention. As long as there's an English channel, and people's lives are shit in their home countries, people will come here.

That's pretty much where I'm at, although I feel better about Archer than that. When Azaz was playing, he wasn't getting the ball despite being in space, so we weren't getting anywhere. The 4231 would work better if Azaz had licence to drop a bit deeper to get on the ball, and the wide lads played slightly narrower with emphasis of runs inside than outside with aimless crosses. It's mind boggling that Still can't get a tune out of this squad.

I know Australia compete in Eurovision, but they aren't actually in Europe mate. Ditto the others.

Until he says that his points aren't actually his position, but hypothetical options. To be fair to you, although I don't agree with a lot of your views, your position is clear.

None of his options are his suggestions for what he would like to see happen, and none of them are the easy steps that he suggested could be taken. There's no pile on - he makes a lot of noise so he can't complain when his comments/suggested options/possibilities/semi positions (or whatever they are supposed to be) are reality checked or questioned.

When you almost commit, you backtrack and sit on the fence. You've not committed to one of the easy steps that you said were available. Not one. That's because there are none. Farcical posting from you again.

Quite. I hate flip flopping. Take a position or don't.

Again, you're rowing backwards. You stated that there were steps that we could easily take. You then mentioned camps or whatever for people but acknowledged it would take time - so not quick or easy. You mentioned withdrawing other things but haven't spelt them out. You mention leaving the ECHR then say that's only a could. What steps that we could easily take does that leave? Indeed, what steps at all? If you want to make a point, back it up. Don't row backwards and then say it wasn't actually your point!! Again, should we leave the ECHR to assist in fighting illegal immigration? It's a simple yes or no.

Ok, I forgot the Vatican. You were asked about the steps we could take to solve the issue. You then mentioned leaving the ECHR. Are you or are you not advocating that we leave the ECHR? If so, what do you think it would achieve re illegal immigration?

They haven't thought about it in truth. Even Albania are in it. Farcical to suggest that we leave.

We will not leave the ECHR and sit alongside Belarus and Russia as the only countries outside of it. The rest does not represent an easy, or feasible, fix. Our court and tribunal system can't process the appeals. Secure bases, yes, achievable and it would dilute our appeal. The French don't want to cooperate. They want people gone. What incentives should go?

Thanks all. I'm glad I missed it. If we haven't made progress by now under Still, we never will.

I've been out tonight and have just seen the score. Feck. What's been the story? Shit performances, poor team set up, all of the above, or just undone by a better team?

Ban the fuckers!

Forces

He really hasn't. He's just highlighted a reality that other people refused to accept. Russia weren't going to run out of people, weapons, money, support from other countries, etc. He's highlighted that, and was right.

No. You assume it's because they're Jewish. Which it isn't.

You're being obtuse, at best. Whatever the team's called, the fans don't know how to behave themselves. They were a disgrace in Amsterdam, didn't behave well yesterday, and quite rightly aren't wanted at the Villa game.

Ha! Maccabi, and who gives a monkeys which particular Maccabi it was.

1. Idiots like you always trot out crap like that rather than accept a reality which doesn't tie in with their opinion. 2. Ditto. I'll ignore the little rant at the end.

Two points: 1. There's a reason Maccabi received a bigger fine than their opponents, and it won't be because their fans were better behaved. 2. Mann reviewed the Amsterdam incident. The police decision considered that plus current credible intelligence. We have no idea what that intelligence was, but seemingly Mann didn't either. I'll take the judgement of the police who have all the facts over that of a politician who didn't all day long.

Sent