View Full Version : Absolutely ****ing ludicrous
rubberduckofdeath
10-05-06, 12:06 PM
.
Sums the country up nicely
why does this not surprise me, totally ludicrous and the poor old taxpayer sees his money go on things like this, i give up, :cry: :cry:
Daryl
What a f**king joke. Just dump em all in the ocean, the sponging b**stards. Even when they do get in they just complain about everything. If you dont like it here, dont f**king come here!! Really gets my blood boiling.
:smt092 :smt093
sharriso74
10-05-06, 12:28 PM
How can their convictions be overturned....Don't tell against their human rights we should take that piece of European s*it and tear it up. Never happen the Blairs wouldbn't be able to feather their nest at the expense of the taxpayers
fair enough. they're only looking for a place to call home
welcome
Sums the country up nicely
Eloquently put....
Welcome to England.
Things could be worse, Theo Walcott could be playing the england squad!
sharriso74
10-05-06, 12:35 PM
Welcome to England.
Things could be worse, Theo Walcott could be playing the england squad!
With David James in goal
RenamedMonkey
10-05-06, 12:43 PM
Unable to deport them, the Government left them in limbo by failing to formally permit them to enter the country.
Anyone seen The Terminal?
The cost to the taxpayer of the whole affair has been unofficially estimated at around £10 million.
Do the government have a big bag of our money put aside for these little oversights?
Unable to deport them, the Government left them in limbo by failing to formally permit them to enter the country.
Anyone seen The Terminal?
Yup! Spot on - except there was no way they were letting him into their country!
RenamedMonkey
10-05-06, 01:03 PM
Unable to deport them, the Government left them in limbo by failing to formally permit them to enter the country.
Anyone seen The Terminal?
Yup! Spot on - except there was no way they were letting him into their country!
Yes, they should leave these chaps in Heathrow. Someone will thinks it's a good idea. Probably the same person who decided to ignore the issue for a few years. I'm not really sure what I'm talking about.
I'm hungry.
Unable to deport them, the Government left them in limbo by failing to formally permit them to enter the country.
Anyone seen The Terminal?
Yup! Spot on - except there was no way they were letting him into their country!
Yes, they should leave these chaps in Heathrow. Someone will thinks it's a good idea. Probably the same person who decided to ignore the issue for a few years. I'm not really sure what I'm talking about.
I'm hungry.
:lol:
Spiderman
10-05-06, 01:21 PM
Ive got no problem with people who want to flee their own country and find refuge someplace else.
What i have got a problem with is people who have the mentality that its acceptable to hijack a plane in order to do this. Clearly organised criminals in my mind to plan that sort of thing and get to execute it.
I know if i had to smuggel a gun and explosives onto a plane i'd probably fail miserably in my attempt.
I also know a guy who used to be in the Iranian army many years ago during the war with Iraq. He nearly lost his mind cos of what happened to him one day and he decided to flee and go someplace that will have him. He shot an Iraqi soldier and thought he was dead. As he approached the guy to take what he could he noticed the guy was begging him for water as he died. Feeling it was the least he could do since he had just taken his life he knelt down to give him a drink. While holding his head up with one hand and pouring water from his bottle into the guys mouth ( a very grand gesture as they were out in the desert and this guy was gonna die regardless of the water or not) with the other he felt a shrap pain in his side.
The dying soldier had only stabbed him in the kidney as a final gesture. :shock:
So this guy decided hw wants out of the whole bloody war and all the madness that goes with it. With all his ability and contacts he could have done what these guys did and took over a plane. I'm sure pre 9/11 it was much easier than it isnow.
But no, he WALKED thru to Afganistan and on to Turkey where he lived for a few years before coming to ive in London as many of his distant family were here too.
Now that sort of person deserves a place to call home. His own country would happily let him die if not execute him for his actions. People who hijack planes just dont fit into the "needy" category for me.
They should serve their time for the crime they commited and be sent home. Like all the others who have commited crimes here but are not entitled to live here. If the country they are from has the death penalty they should have made a diffrent attempt to enter this country (or any other). A legal attempt.
Ceri JC
10-05-06, 01:51 PM
Look on the bright side, it's yet another shambolic failing of the current government and should hopefully help the cretins to NOT BLOODY VOTE FOR THEM NEXT TIME.
Spiderman
10-05-06, 03:32 PM
Look on the bright side, it's yet another shambolic failing of the current government and should hopefully help the cretins to NOT BLOODY VOTE FOR THEM NEXT TIME.
Yeh, but that presumes one lot is better than the other lot. Which i just done believe.
The Govt is the Govt no matter what they claim to be before they get voted in, ie tory or labour.
What i have got a problem with is people who have the mentality that its acceptable to hijack a plane in order to do this. Clearly organised criminals in my mind to plan that sort of thing and get to execute it.
Either organised or in mortal fear for their lives driving them to that level of desperation to flee the Taliban? Its hardly known for its merciful and forgiving outlook on its citizens actions.
They should serve their time for the crime they commited and be sent home. Like all the others who have commited crimes here but are not entitled to live here. If the country they are from has the death penalty they should have made a diffrent attempt to enter this country (or any other). A legal attempt.
Ok they do their time for the crime. But what does sending them home to their deaths achieve?
Its hardly a good reflection on us is it? We have a prison system around which you do your time then are released hopefully rehabilitated. I somehow dont believe they will be reoffending in the same manner again - unless we threaten to send them back to their deaths.
If there were a guarantee of their survival in Afghanistan, then yes, deport them. But there isnt. The likelihood of them lasting a day is remote. Better to let them do the time for their crime, then admit them on strict conditions - which it appears theyve adhered to so far - and then let them prove they can be positive contributors to this society. Thats what annoys me the most - the government have prevented them from doing that and effectively confined them to living on benefits.
None of us, fortunately, know what it was like under the Taliban. So how can any of us judge so harshly the extreme measures some undertook to escape? Not everyone has the capability or luck to do what Spideys friend did. When under pressure some make the decision and do something constructively. Others dont.
Either way, punishing them by killing them - which is what we would be doing if they were sent back - is not the answer imho.
Oh boy, thats going to get some flack isnt it? :P
northwind
10-05-06, 04:28 PM
Yup, you've got to be pretty desperate to do that don't you? It's not the course of action of someone who just wants to sponge off the taxpayer, IMO. But not exactly the action of someone I desperately want for a neigbour, come to think of it.
I don't think it's exactly controversial that the Taliban are Bad People though, or that we've left a power vacuum in Afghanistan which leaves some areas unsafe.
Ceri JC
10-05-06, 04:45 PM
Look on the bright side, it's yet another shambolic failing of the current government and should hopefully help the cretins to NOT BLOODY VOTE FOR THEM NEXT TIME.
Yeh, but that presumes one lot is better than the other lot. Which i just done believe.
The Govt is the Govt no matter what they claim to be before they get voted in, ie tory or labour.
In general, I'd agree with you. I would, however, say that in this particular instance, the Conservatives policies would be more along the lines of "send them back where they came from". I recognise that it's law, rather than governmental policy, but we both know governments can change, or conveniently ignore laws. :wink:
northwind
10-05-06, 07:46 PM
In general, I'd agree with you. I would, however, say that in this particular instance, the Conservatives policies would be more along the lines of "send them back where they came from".
Thats been the labour policy in this case too.
Biker Biggles
10-05-06, 08:15 PM
Why did they fly to Stanstead though?The plane was highjacked as it left Kabul so what's wrong with flying it to the nearest refuge country like Pakistan?Lots of Afgan refugees there,but the standard of living is not so good.Many of those have returned to Afganistan since the Taliban were overthrown,maybe because they were genuine refugees as opposed to the largely economic migrants we get here.
I don't find it acceptable that air piracy can be compatable with being allowed to stay in this country.It sort of sends out the "wrong signals" to others. :shock:
northwind
10-05-06, 08:22 PM
Maybe they thought- quite sensibly- that hijacking a plane and flying to Pakistan is more likely to be met with a bullet to the face? :)
If we went to ther country we would have to abide by there laws and traditions so they should have to abide by ours and if they don't like it they know what to do!!!!!!!!
northwind
10-05-06, 08:51 PM
I suppose technically they didn't hijack it here :) And if the government sent them home, then it'd be them not abiding by the law...
The other thing is, if you went to much of Afghanistan, you wouldn't be expected to abide by their laws at all- that's kind of the point. The place is a disaster zone, much of it anyway- the government have literally no control whatsoever over huge areas.
My devil's advocate powers grow weak today.
If we went to ther country we would have to abide by there laws and traditions so they should have to abide by ours and if they don't like it they know what to do!!!!!!!!
But they have abided by our laws. The controls put in place by the government from the time of their arrival have been adhered to. The hijacking didnt take place here so technically theyve not broken any of our laws.
Oh and as Northwind says, if you think there is any law in Afghanistan youre greatly mistaken.
Still its nice to be so judgemental when you've never lived in a country where one person could decide whether you live or die, whether your family is tortured and beaten and their lives destroyed.
But seriously, no matter what theyve done, are you really suggesting we should send them back to be murdered? Because if you are, then I fail to see what distinguishes you from them. Other than they never killed anyone.
Because you wouldnt actually do the killing, it doesnt mean theres not blood on the hands of anyone who sent them back to that fate. Thats the crux of it though. Not one person on this forum can ever stand up and honestly say they can truly understand what its like to live under a regime where the only way out is to take such desperate and drastic measures.
I really dont see how we can judge on that basis that we've been very lucky with our political system. No mater what you think of politicians, none of them approach any semblance of nastiness and evil that the Taliban have inflicted on the Afghan population.
stewboy
10-05-06, 09:25 PM
PURE SCUM ....... I HATE THIS $HIT COUNTRY ....IT SUCKS
SLOT THE LOT I SAY :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil:
stewboy
10-05-06, 09:25 PM
If we went to ther country we would have to abide by there laws and traditions so they should have to abide by ours and if they don't like it they know what to do!!!!!!!!
But they have abided by our laws. The controls put in place by the government from the time of their arrival have been adhered to. The hijacking didnt take place here so technically theyve not broken any of our laws.
Oh and as Northwind says, if you think there is any law in Afghanistan youre greatly mistaken.
Still its nice to be so judgemental when you've never lived in a country where one person could decide whether you live or die, whether your family is tortured and beaten and their lives destroyed.
But seriously, no matter what theyve done, are you really suggesting we should send them back to be murdered? Because if you are, then I fail to see what distinguishes you from them. Other than they never killed anyone.
Because you wouldnt actually do the killing, it doesnt mean theres not blood on the hands of anyone who sent them back to that fate. Thats the crux of it though. Not one person on this forum can ever stand up and honestly say they can truly understand what its like to live under a regime where the only way out is to take such desperate and drastic measures.
I really dont see how we can judge on that basis that we've been very lucky with our political system. No mater what you think of politicians, none of them approach any semblance of nastiness and evil that the Taliban have inflicted on the Afghan population.
LYNW
somtimes you do chat some crap!!!!
i mean i do chat crap but you do spit serious 8ollocks .....like serious *
8ollocks ....
why she we have ......£uck them of home ...who gives a $hit if they get killed ....
if theyre prepared to carry guns and hi jack stuff then so be it send them back home where its ok to do that !!!!
Jelster
10-05-06, 09:29 PM
So Lynn, do you think it's acceptable that "our" country should be a suitable nesting ground for theives and violent criminals (the sort of people that would steal weapons and then hijack a plane) ?
I for one do not want that type of person here, and considering what they did to get here I wouldn't have any guilt in sending back where they came from.
Why didn't they go to France or Belgium etc ?? Because they would have sent the bastids packing, that's why..... Put them in hand cuffs on the next plane home, I'd rather cover the price of the fair that the cost of keeping them on state benefits for another 30 years !
They're not wanted, show them the door, my concience is clear, I'd do it for the sake of MY country.....
.
stewboy
10-05-06, 09:34 PM
So Lynn, do you think it's acceptable that "our" country should be a suitable nesting ground for theives and violent criminals (the sort of people that would steal weapons and then hijack a plane) ?
I for one do not want that type of person here, and considering what they did to get here I wouldn't have any guilt in sending back where they came from.
Why didn't they go to France or Belgium etc ?? Because they would have sent the bastids packing, that's why..... Put them in hand cuffs on the next plane home, I'd rather cover the price of the fair that the cost of keeping them on state benefits for another 30 years !
They're not wanted, show them the door, my concience is clear, I'd do it for the sake of MY country.....
.
:winner:
northwind
10-05-06, 09:36 PM
So Lynn, do you think it's acceptable that "our" country should be a suitable nesting ground for theives and violent criminals (the sort of people that would steal weapons and then hijack a plane) ?
You could say they were driven to it. That they felt they had no other options. They didn't do it for personal gain (well, other than survival)- they didn't kill anyone, or resist arrest, though of coruse they did cause terror for all those passengers and crew. Nobody's going to defend them, but "thieves"... If your life was threatened, would you not steal from the people doing the threatening?
Peter Henry
10-05-06, 09:38 PM
I once again find myself shocked and dissapointed at the lack of charity displayed in this thread by forum members. Are such opinions common place these days in England? If this had been common knowledge perhaps our friends would have chosen another destination for their little jaunt. And thus depriving your nation the chance of it's contribution to humanity. :?
Mr.Jelster...England is NOT your country,it is your birthplace and the place where you live yes, but to adopt such an attitude quite frankly is to my mind bordering on fascism. You are merely a ctizen of said land. I am surprised at you.
If it were not for the fact that England has spawned such scum and low life's itself....and does not really have the answers as to what to do with them perhaps some of the comments on here would not be so judgemental.
You take a look around at how many are life long wasters and spongers off the state? The over all bill then makes this particular case seem like the tip one would give to a hotel Bell Hop.
What would they do to them in Spain then?
amarko5
10-05-06, 09:49 PM
What would they do to them in Spain then?
welcome them with open arms and then recruit into ETA :P
skidmarx
10-05-06, 09:50 PM
Yeah me too....shocked and despondent....as PH said. We are a bunch of lucky B'stards. What chance has the world got if a people so fortunate with wealth and democracy (oh come on what else you got?) cannot open its hearts to people under oppression and set an example to those in power else where? What better tool but tolerance and generosity do we have to defeat the corruptions of pwer and greed around the world? We could bomb them? We could ignore them? Well that's how we got where we are now.........
So Lynn, do you think it's acceptable that "our" country should be a suitable nesting ground for theives and violent criminals (the sort of people that would steal weapons and then hijack a plane) ?
I for one do not want that type of person here, and considering what they did to get here I wouldn't have any guilt in sending back where they came from.
Why didn't they go to France or Belgium etc ?? Because they would have sent the bastids packing, that's why..... Put them in hand cuffs on the next plane home, I'd rather cover the price of the fair that the cost of keeping them on state benefits for another 30 years !
They're not wanted, show them the door, my concience is clear, I'd do it for the sake of MY country.....
.
Oh yes. While we're all on the judgemental ride lets all do the assumption rollercoaster too. :roll:
Theyve committed one crime that you know of. To escape from a regime that to be frank anyone would want to escape from. But that automatically equals they are criminals, theives etc etc. Doesnt anyone base any posts on facts any more?
And what part of THE GOVERNMENT KEPT THEM ON BENEFITS do you misunderstand? Im sure they want to do nothing but put that episode behind them and stay in a country they arent going to be murdered and work.
And frankly, its a sad day when our country adds up to a bunch of people selfish enough to not understand someones despertate actions and sanction sending people to their deaths. Your conscience may be clear, but frankly if thats what our country means then Im truly saddened by that. Because it makes you, and our country, no better than the terror regimes implemented in those countries. And I thought we were at least better than that. Clearly Im mistaken.
I have a view of our country of upholding peoples right to life, to make people pay for their crimes but not hold it against them if they do their time. To be fair and decent and not actively participate in murder of individuals no matter what they have done.
Stewboy, I can only say shut up. Im truly shocked by your callousness. Anyone who actively sanctions murder which is what your post amounts to is no better than they are or the Taliban that kills them. Frankly I thought better of you than that. Frankly, I think better of my country than what this thread amounts to.
What would they do to them in Spain then?
welcome them with open arms and then recruit into ETA :P Nice one :lol:
the_runt69
10-05-06, 09:59 PM
But surely even if the country is lawless the Taliban who they fled from are no longer in power any more, so they have no reason to stay here as their lives would not be in any more jepody than any other Afgan if they went home.
H
stewboy
10-05-06, 10:03 PM
and lynw i thought better of yiu than to say its all ok and dandy to let hi-jakers stay in our country for free.
if we did the same ...... honestly what do you think would happen ????
20 - 30 years maybe ???
sorry lynw im against this one :!:
amarko5
10-05-06, 10:03 PM
they are on easy street :evil: they are given money and houses as a priority and also its not just the 9 it's all the family members that have arrived here as well.
nope>>> no charity jail em then return em . simple as :wink:
P.S. and send a few thousand more with them :lol:
northwind
10-05-06, 10:05 PM
But surely even if the country is lawless the Taliban who they fled from are no longer in power any more, so they have no reason to stay here as their lives would not be in any more jepody than any other Afgan if they went home.
The Taliban still control much of the country, and influence the whole place. They wouldn't be in any more danger than any other afghan who'd mortally ****ed off a gang of CIA-trained, war-hardened heavily armed religious fanatics in a country without meaningful law enforcement.
Hell, I don't go back to bars where I once offended a bouncer.
But surely even if the country is lawless the Taliban who they fled from are no longer in power any more, so they have no reason to stay here as their lives would not be in any more jepody than any other Afgan if they went home.
H
:roll:
I really cant be arsed to give you a precis of current affairs. Go read the news. Go do your own research. Then you will realise what a mess it still is out there.
The Taliban arent "officially" in power but theres areas of the country where they are still a force to be reckoned with. And it is extremely likely they will be killed on their return.
And Im confused. You say the country is lawless and yet you think that = No Taliban so thats a safe place to send people who've escaped from the previous regime? :roll: :?
amarko5
10-05-06, 10:10 PM
The Taliban arent "officially" in power but theres areas of the country where they are still a force to be reckoned with. And it is extremely likely they will be killed on their return.
well that would be 9 less then at least :wink:
the_runt69
10-05-06, 10:10 PM
read what i wrote Lyn, I said no more in jepody than any other Afgan. It is a matter of whether their lives are in mortal Danger from the taliban not being killed by a lawless society. If everybody thought the way you do no one would be sent back in case they got run over by the odd car/moped/ elephent etc.
H
and lynw i thought better of yiu than to say its all ok and dandy to let hi-jakers stay in our country for free.
if we did the same ...... honestly what do you think would happen ????
20 - 30 years maybe ???
sorry lynw im against this one :!:
Ok, go back and read my post. Which part of if it was safe for them to be deported Id agree that should be done did you misunderstand?
The point is, we are actively participating in murder. If you cant see that drags this country down because we send "undesirables" to their deaths and you think thats right, Im really astounded, shocked and horrified. You really havent got a clue how lucky you are that you'll never go through a situation like this.
And can you not see that makes us no better than the collaborators who informed on the Jews to allow the Germans to send them to their deaths? They did nothing more but get the "undesirables" dispatched from their areas. They handed them over to the Germans to be killed in the concentration camps.
What youre suggesting is EXACTLY the same principle. We may not actively kill them, but we are sending them to their deaths because theyre deemed to be "undesirable". Dont argue its not, its exactly the same and why I thought this country was better than that.
northwind
10-05-06, 10:14 PM
Stewboy, these aint your regular hijackers... Tarring them with the same brush as terrorists muddies the issue I think. Lynw's hardly saying "Free all hijackers". They didn't do it for profit, or for politics, or for religion or to spread terror, or to attack anyone. It's a unique case. If years later, after a "regime change", it's still been judged that Afghanistan can't be safe for them, what must it have been like when the ****ers were in power?
they are given money and houses as a priority and also its not just the 9 it's all the family members that have arrived here as well.
As's been pointed out, they weren't legally allowed to work.
read what i wrote Lyn, I said no more in jepody than any other Afgan. It is a matter of whether their lives are in mortal Danger from the taliban not being killed by a lawless society. If everybody thought the way you do no one would be sent back in case they got run over by the odd car/moped/ elephent etc.
H
*sigh* but the Taliban are still a force to be reckoned with out there. Its not so much from the lawless society but the fact that the Taliban still hold power.
:roll:
ok I am just going to say one thing about this subject
I'm a sitting on the fence on this one because I can see all sides fairly and believe in humanity to eventually find a better solution,
everybody please stay calm!!!
kitten xx :cat:
medwaysv
10-05-06, 10:18 PM
Contraversial... definately!
Send em packing and the send the bleeding heart brigade packing as well!!
It has been said on here.... "do their time.." What 'time' are these hijackers doing? They are doing no time. Not even working!
What about the whole Charles Clarke fiasco?! Have you forgotten that already?!?! He was fired only last week for losing over 1000 assylum seekers some of whom only came to light again because they had commited VIOLENT crimes!!
How can this possibly justify keeping these people here?!?!?!
Do you not think the government is oppressing it's own citizens in favour of the rights of these assylum seekers.
Bo**ox to that! Send em back!
Stewboy, these aint your regular hijackers... Tarring them with the same brush as terrorists muddies the issue I think. Lynw's hardly saying "Free all hijackers". They didn't do it for profit, or for politics, or for religion or to spread terror, or to attack anyone. It's a unique case. If years later, after a "regime change", it's still been judged that Afghanistan can't be safe for them, what must it have been like when the ****ers were in power?
they are given money and houses as a priority and also its not just the 9 it's all the family members that have arrived here as well.
As's been pointed out, they weren't legally allowed to work.
:thumbsup: Pre-fricken-cisely. Im not saying we let everyone in - Im just saying this case is unique and should be judged on its own merits.
But Im still shocked by those who actively think this country should participate in their murder. I really really am truly saddened by this thread for the complete lack of compassion and understanding thats lacking.
skidmarx
10-05-06, 10:20 PM
OMG! Its a broad church but the send 'em packing brigade have turned up!
amarko5
10-05-06, 10:21 PM
As's been pointed out, they weren't legally allowed to work.
and they have no intention of working :? why do you think they chose Britain as opposed to anywhere else in the world.
wake up you lot and smell the roses.
Britain = easy touch
anywhere else = hassle and probably deportation.
It has been said on here.... "do their time.." What 'time' are these hijackers doing? They are doing no time. Not even working!
You<-------------------------------------------------------------------> The point
The fact theyre not working is because theyre obeying the law and regulations OUR government stipulated. So quit with the sponging issue. ITS NOT THEIR FAULT. Its our governments for not making a decision quickly.
But again, someone else who doesnt want to see the facts because it taints their view of things.
skidmarx
10-05-06, 10:22 PM
Who EXACTLY are 'these people'?
As's been pointed out, they weren't legally allowed to work.
and they have no intention of working :? why do you think they chose Britain as opposed to anywhere else in the world.
wake up you lot and smell the roses.
Britain = easy touch
anywhere else = hassle and probably deportation.
:roll:
Hows that assumption rollercoaster going? Prove what you've said is true. Go on.
How do you know they dont want to work? Dont tar everyone with the same brush. Frankly theres more lazy British Chavs and teenage single mums out there that are a much more of a problem to the benefis system than any number of immigrants.
Godikus
10-05-06, 10:24 PM
if all they were doing was coming to England to flee the regime, then why the fark did they stay on the plane holding hostages for 70 hours. why not just chuck down the guns and come out when they landed. Why terrorize people for 70 hours?
If any of us here in the UK done that we sure as hell wouldn't be getting paid for it without any realy punnishment.
Lets face it. they have had a 6 year all expenses paid holiday. we should just give them there guns back and pack them off home so they stand a fighting chance.
if all they were doing was coming to England to flee the regime, then why the fark did they stay on the plane holding hostages for 70 hours. why not just chuck down the guns and come out when they landed. Why terrorize people for 70 hours? .
Er because the plane was surrounded by armed police? That the negotiation of release of hostages and request for assylum doesnt all happen in five minutes? :roll:
amarko5
10-05-06, 10:26 PM
Stewboy, these aint your regular hijackers... Tarring them with the same brush as terrorists muddies the issue I think. Lynw's hardly saying "Free all hijackers". They didn't do it for profit, or for politics, or for religion or to spread terror, or to attack anyone. It's a unique case. If years later, after a "regime change", it's still been judged that Afghanistan can't be safe for them, what must it have been like when the ****ers were in power?
they are given money and houses as a priority and also its not just the 9 it's all the family members that have arrived here as well.
As's been pointed out, they weren't legally allowed to work.
:thumbsup: Pre-fricken-cisely. Im not saying we let everyone in - Im just saying this case is unique and should be judged on its own merits.
But Im still shocked by those who actively think this country should participate in their murder. I really really am truly saddened by this thread for the complete lack of compassion and understanding thats lacking.
what about the compassion they showed all the other people on that plane 70 hours of mental torture by ARMED with guns AND Explosives Terorists (yes terorists ) they terrorised those poor people who were legitimately having a flight.
and what were the thoughts in those passengers heads " are the sas gonna storm the plane " are we going to die.
nope no compassion here whatsoever.
Godikus
10-05-06, 10:28 PM
if all they were doing was coming to England to flee the regime, then why the fark did they stay on the plane holding hostages for 70 hours. why not just chuck down the guns and come out when they landed. Why terrorize people for 70 hours? .
Er because the plane was surrounded by armed police? That the negotiation of release of hostages and request for assylum doesnt all happen in five minutes? :roll:
Er calm yer beans missus :roll:
the_runt69
10-05-06, 10:30 PM
After watching the "Ayslum seekers" at Sangate a couple of years ago and having them arrive on trains from the continent bent on an easy life on benifits over here and this was proved on a BBC documentry The whole world knows that this country is a soft touch. I've nothing against people coming here who are prepared to work and contribute to the economy, but there are far too many who just turn up with no intension of working. I have to call the police on more than one occasion a week to Hostile beggers on my trains, most of whom come from the Balkans and middle east.
H
Its about time we opened our eyes
northwind
10-05-06, 10:32 PM
read what i wrote Lyn, I said no more in jepody than any other Afgan. It is a matter of whether their lives are in mortal Danger from the taliban not being killed by a lawless society. If everybody thought the way you do no one would be sent back in case they got run over by the odd car/moped/ elephent etc.
But that's not the case- they've been assessed as being in mortal danger, not just the regular background peril that everyone there is subjected to. Not "we can't send people back to Afghanistan because it's a bit dodgy" but "We can't send these people back because we believe they will be killed". They're enemies of well-equipped, well-trained, well-organised Bad People, and the law there would be no protection or deterrant. You don't send people to their deaths.
If you think the Taliban aren't a threat, how have they managed to kill 12 British soldiers and 36 American soldiers this year?
stewboy
10-05-06, 10:33 PM
Hollocks .....i still say send them home !
i spent seven months in iraq fighting these fkers .....
i cant be ar$ed arguing .....
im wright, your wrong!
if all they were doing was coming to England to flee the regime, then why the fark did they stay on the plane holding hostages for 70 hours. why not just chuck down the guns and come out when they landed. Why terrorize people for 70 hours? .
Er because the plane was surrounded by armed police? That the negotiation of release of hostages and request for assylum doesnt all happen in five minutes? :roll:
Er calm yer beans missus :roll:
Just making the point you seemed to have missed so you needed to ask the question why it was so long. :wink: But Im sure there are other reasons why the negotiations took so long.
Godikus
10-05-06, 10:37 PM
if all they were doing was coming to England to flee the regime, then why the fark did they stay on the plane holding hostages for 70 hours. why not just chuck down the guns and come out when they landed. Why terrorize people for 70 hours? .
Er because the plane was surrounded by armed police? That the negotiation of release of hostages and request for assylum doesnt all happen in five minutes? :roll:
Er calm yer beans missus :roll:
Just making the point you seemed to have missed so you needed to ask the question why it was so long. :wink: But Im sure there are other reasons why the negotiations took so long.
yeah, they could have wanted fuel.
why not just fly them over the desert and let them loose in the middle of nowhere, if they get caught there then it's there own damn fault and we done all we could to stop them getting them selfs killed.
medwaysv
10-05-06, 10:37 PM
read what i wrote Lyn, I said no more in jepody than any other Afgan. It is a matter of whether their lives are in mortal Danger from the taliban not being killed by a lawless society. If everybody thought the way you do no one would be sent back in case they got run over by the odd car/moped/ elephent etc.
But that's not the case- they've been assessed as being in mortal danger, not just the regular background peril that everyone there is subjected to. Not "we can't send people back to Afghanistan because it's a bit dodgy" but "We can't send these people back because we believe they will be killed". They're enemies of well-equipped, well-trained, well-organised Bad People, and the law there would be no protection or deterrant. You don't send people to their deaths.
If you think the Taliban aren't a threat, how have they managed to kill 12 British soldiers and 36 American soldiers this year?
Could these hijackers not have been potentially sending their captives to their deaths by their actions??
Its about time we opened our eyes
I disagree. I think its about time we opened our minds.
Sorry, it seems too many on here rely on the Sun* editorial for their opinion without any factual basis for most of it. If you did your research on immigration, actually found out the facts of welfare spending and still felt the same fair enough. But Im sure the facts about the issue would show the scaremongering propaganda is precisely that - nothing factual about it whatsoever.
But I doubt anyone will bother. Its easy to be given an opinion. Hard to actually do the work and form one of your own. :? :(
* substitute for Rag of your choice.
northwind
10-05-06, 10:41 PM
and they have no intention of working :? why do you think they chose Britain as opposed to anywhere else in the world.
Obviously, you've met them and gauged their intentions :roll: Britain's an obvious choice because we were vocally opposed to the Taliban at the time- to our credit. Incidentally, the UK was allegedly suggested as a destination by the pilot (allegedly, because he said this in a statement then later retracted it) They flew to Khazakhstan and Uzbekistan first but weren't allowed to land (or to disembark; differing reports here) Point here being that they didn't choose to fly to the UK, they chose to fly to nearby countries first.
IMO, highjacking a plane is not what you do if you want to "sponge off the state". If that's the plan, you don't start off by making yourself a public enemy. That's the act of someone who needs out, and will think about what happens next when it happens.
northwind
10-05-06, 10:42 PM
Could these hijackers not have been potentially sending their captives to their deaths by their actions??
Eh... no. Not by intent, at least.
northwind
10-05-06, 10:43 PM
i spent seven months in iraq fighting these fkers .....
You spent 7 months in Iraq fighting Afghan enemies of muslim fundamentalists? :)
Its about time we opened our eyes
I disagree. I think its about time we opened our minds.
Sorry, it seems too many on here rely on the Sun* editorial for their opinion without any factual basis for most of it. If you did your research on immigration, actually found out the facts of welfare spending and still felt the same fair enough. But Im sure the facts about the issue would show the scaremongering propaganda is precisely that - nothing factual about it whatsoever.
But I doubt anyone will bother. Its easy to be given an opinion. Hard to actually do the work and form one of your own. :? :(
* substitute for Rag of your choice. I don't read the sun I read the sport more pictures in there :lol:
No sympathy. I can only hazard a guess at these peoples' plight in Afghanistan, unless you've been in that position I don't think you can.
But why should we prefer the interests of a bunch of foreign asylum seekers to those of the people lawfully on the hijacked aircraft? 70 hours - I wouldn't have liked to be on that plane.
I don't really understand why our Army is there with our service people risking their lives, but that's another matter. Perhaps Blair can explain. More likely, he can't.
the_runt69
10-05-06, 10:45 PM
Sorry Lynn dont read papers very often, over my life have had to deal with these people espicially the ones sent by the job centres who turn up and find they're better off claiming benifits and sod off after a couple of weeks.
H
medwaysv
10-05-06, 10:46 PM
Could these hijackers not have been potentially sending their captives to their deaths by their actions??
Eh... no. Not by intent, at least.
Not the point. The POTENTIAL was there.
amarko5
10-05-06, 10:46 PM
Its about time we opened our eyes
I disagree. I think its about time we opened our minds.
Sorry, it seems too many on here rely on the Sun* editorial for their opinion without any factual basis for most of it. If you did your research on immigration, actually found out the facts of welfare spending and still felt the same fair enough. But Im sure the facts about the issue would show the scaremongering propaganda is precisely that - nothing factual about it whatsoever.
But I doubt anyone will bother. Its easy to be given an opinion. Hard to actually do the work and form one of your own. :? :(
* substitute for Rag of your choice.
Let's just put it this way Lyn 3 deaths in carlisle fairly recently. 2 were comitted by illegal imigrants and 1 by a "legal" immigrant.
one of the deaths was a year old child stabbed to death in his mothers arms . the mother had had the child to an illegal. she dumped him when he beat her and the child. guess what he was out on bail at hte time of the murder.
now say what you will but i know the young lady mentioned above and her life is ruined .
don't try and preach leaniancy and forgivness because it just will not wash.
those who come here legitimately and work for a living, fine those spongers and beggers and Terrorists (whichever way you paint it they were terrorists to the passengers) go home.
No sympathy. I can only hazard a guess at these peoples' plight in Afghanistan, unless you've been in that position I don't think you can.
But why should we prefer the interests of a bunch of foreign asylum seekers to those of the people lawfully on the hijacked aircraft? 70 hours - I wouldn't have liked to be on that plane.
I don't really understand why our Army is there with our service people risking their lives, but that's another matter. Perhaps Blair can explain. More likely, he can't.
But Ed the issue isnt really about that. Its really about whether its right to send people to their deaths, knowingly doing so. I dont think it is.
Now if & when Afghanistan stabilises and its safe to do so - I have no problem with them being deported.
I just do not believe that no matter what people have done, we should actively participate in their murder by allowing it to happen by deporting them.
northwind
10-05-06, 10:50 PM
now say what you will but i know the young lady mentioned above and her life is ruined .
By different people. Were they even from the same country? How would you like to be judged by the acts of one british person?
Peter Henry
10-05-06, 10:50 PM
In Spain we welcome the poor and unfortunate with open arms. The Guardia Civil are constantly netting up out of the Med hoardes of immigranbts fleeing the African continent in vessels poorly equipped for the job.
We bring them home to sit on our beaches and sell wood carved elephants . We allow them to sell "genuine" CD's to those red skinned people that visit here in their ill fitting shorts,socks and sandals. We embrace their freedom of spirit and allow them to open market stalls displaying their vast array us useless tit tats that oddly get snapped up by the canny British tourists.
They are very tolerant and always obliging when the wise guy holiday maker feigns dissapointment at only being shown copy Cartier and Rolex watches. What he really wanted was one of those fishing rods or binoculars the guy had last time. The spirited entrepreneur will then dissapear to his clapped out Renault parked in a dark street somehow to reappear with a triumphant look on his face some time later, now carrying the requested items. Only to be thwarted as Mr.Wise guy waves him away as he does not have the right colour item to offer. :?
And if they ever misbehave we sit them in a darkened room and blast them with wailing,screeching, lamenting Flamenco music until they beg to be dropped back in the Med. :P
Marko...Err get with the programme mate, ETA is negotiating a political solution to it's long held grievances. A cease fire and end to all hostilities was called some almost 2 months ago. :wink:
those who come here legitimately and work for a living, fine those spongers and beggers and Terrorists (whichever way you paint it they were terrorists to the passengers) go home.
So we should send the next lot of London bombers and their helpers back home to Leeds then?
And what about all the British spongers and beggars? Do not tell me theyre a minority. We've had the biggest teenage pregnancy rate for decades - predominantly white teenage girls.
The problems you seem to wholly attribute to immigrants are just as prevalent, if not more so, with British people.
medwaysv
10-05-06, 10:52 PM
No sympathy. I can only hazard a guess at these peoples' plight in Afghanistan, unless you've been in that position I don't think you can.
But why should we prefer the interests of a bunch of foreign asylum seekers to those of the people lawfully on the hijacked aircraft? 70 hours - I wouldn't have liked to be on that plane.
I don't really understand why our Army is there with our service people risking their lives, but that's another matter. Perhaps Blair can explain. More likely, he can't.
But Ed the issue isnt really about that. Its really about whether its right to send people to their deaths, knowingly doing so. I dont think it is.
Now if & when Afghanistan stabilises and its safe to do so - I have no problem with them being deported.
I just do not believe that no matter what people have done, we should actively participate in their murder by allowing it to happen by deporting them.
But its ok for them to potentially participate (threaten) to murder.......!!
amarko5
10-05-06, 10:53 PM
Marko...Err get with the programme mate, ETA is negotiating a political solution to it's long held grievances. A cease fire and end to all hostilities was called some almost 2 months ago. :wink:
A point you so eloquently posted about some 2 months ago :P :lol:
it was a hypothetical scenario :P :wink:
By different people. Were they even from the same country? How would you like to be judged by the acts of one british person?
:shock: :(
That makes me think how the rest of the world must judge us if the young Chavs in Ibiza are anything to go by.
Id rather not be judged by that standard. :wink:
21QUEST
10-05-06, 10:54 PM
Let's just put it this way Lyn 3 deaths in carlisle fairly recently. 2 were comitted by illegal imigrants and 1 by a "legal" immigrant.
..and how many crimes are committed each year by locals?
Cheers
Ben
northwind
10-05-06, 10:54 PM
But why should we prefer the interests of a bunch of foreign asylum seekers to those of the people lawfully on the hijacked aircraft? 70 hours - I wouldn't have liked to be on that plane.
I don't really understand why our Army is there with our service people risking their lives, but that's another matter. Perhaps Blair can explain. More likely, he can't.
It's not a case of preferring their rights over the hijacked... Not sure why you'd think it is.
As for the war in Afghanistan... **** all to do with terrorism, but to be honest I personally was glad to see the Taliban out of power. It should never have been allowed to happen in the first place, but that's what happens when America plays games with other countries. But they justification for it was false, and the execution's been poor- and as soon as the headlines stopped being exciting and it became a grind of deaths and attacks, the US (and by default, our government) lost interest and ****ed off to Iraq, forgetting about the rebuilding and the stabilising we'd said we'd be doing. Left the job half done.
Godikus
10-05-06, 10:55 PM
We've had the biggest teenage pregnancy rate for decades - predominantly white teenage girls.
what does that have to do with anything? or are you implying that all female teenage girls who fall pregnant will not get a job, and will sponge and beg. 'cause that simply isn't the case.
In Spain we welcome the poor and unfortunate with open arms. The Guardia Civil are constantly netting up out of the Med hoardes of immigranbts fleeing the African continent in vessels poorly equipped for the job.
We bring them home to sit on our beaches and sell wood carved elephants . We allow them to sell "genuine" CD's to those red skinned people that visit here in their ill fitting shorts,socks and sandals. We embrace their freedom of spirit and allow them to open market stalls displaying their vast array us useless tit tats that oddly get snapped up by the canny British tourists.
And if they ever misbehave we sit them in a darkened room and blast them with wailing,screeching, lamenting Flamenco music until they beg to be dropped back in the Med. :P
Marko...Err get with the programme mate, ETA is negotiating a political solution to it's long held grievances. A cease fire and end to all hostilities was called some almost 2 months ago. :wink: But they don't get state benifits do they?
northwind
10-05-06, 10:57 PM
We've had the biggest teenage pregnancy rate for decades - predominantly white teenage girls.
what does that have to do with anything? or are you implying that all female teenage girls who fall pregnant will not get a job, and will sponge and beg. 'cause that simply isn't the case.
Well then, turn that around- some immigrants come here to sponge and beg, but not all. Same thing, just about perceptions.
21QUEST
10-05-06, 10:57 PM
And what about all the British spongers and beggars? Do not tell me theyre a minority. We've had the biggest teenage pregnancy rate for decades - predominantly white teenage girls.
The problems you seem to wholly attribute to immigrants are just as prevalent, if not more so, with British people.
:thumbsup:
Precisely why I think a lot of people are talking crap when it comes to these posts.
Cheers
Ben
Peter Henry
10-05-06, 10:58 PM
Billy...Do they not get benefits? Are they refused benfits? How up to speed are you on the workings of the Hacienda here in Spain? As a tax and social security paying resident I might benefit from your knowledge?
amarko5
10-05-06, 10:58 PM
The problems you seem to wholly attribute to immigrants are just as prevalent, if not more so, with British people.
So we compound it by inviting more immigrants :!: I know we have scum in this country just like many other country's , we should be spending some of that 10 million trying to sort our own house out instead of squandering it on more low life's.
just see how you feel when one of these "upstanding citizens of a foreign nationallity " :? murder the child of someone you know personally. then I shall be interested to read the different posts from lynw.
21QUEST
10-05-06, 10:58 PM
We've had the biggest teenage pregnancy rate for decades - predominantly white teenage girls.
what does that have to do with anything? or are you implying that all female teenage girls who fall pregnant will not get a job, and will sponge and beg. 'cause that simply isn't the case.
Well then, turn that around- some immigrants come here to sponge and beg, but not all. Same thing, just about perceptions.
:lol: :lol: :P
Cheers
Ben
northwind
10-05-06, 10:59 PM
Could these hijackers not have been potentially sending their captives to their deaths by their actions??
Eh... no. Not by intent, at least.
Not the point. The POTENTIAL was there.
Yup, but minimal. Perhaps something goes badly wrong, but that's the only way it happens. The threat of violence was all they needed. There doesn't seem to be any realistic threat that they would have downed the plane, so that leaves misadventure- and these guys were desperate, but not stupid. If they'd run out of fuel, for instance, do you think they'd have chosen death and mass murder over landing somewhere? I think we've no reason to think they would.
amarko5
10-05-06, 11:00 PM
Let's just put it this way Lyn 3 deaths in carlisle fairly recently. 2 were comitted by illegal imigrants and 1 by a "legal" immigrant.
..and how many crimes are committed each year by locals?
Cheers
Ben
as a matter of interest in the same period 1 and that was over the border in scotland still local but not in carlisle
so "but out" ben or do some research before replying :P :lol:
I think lyn has a point here to be fair, and I've probably missed it.
I do not agree under any circumstances with any state imposing the death penalty, whether it be Malaysia for drugs, or a US state for whatever. I simply don't agree with it, never have, never will. Two wrongs don't make a right.
So why should we be complicit in returning people to a country where they will face near certain death. I don't know that these people will face a sticky end there. But we should not facilitate it.
So a correct penalty? Life in jail. Deportation if safe to do so. Yes we end up paying, but so we do for so many other unworthies that clog up prison. Do a few more make that much difference? No I don't think so.
Godikus
10-05-06, 11:02 PM
We've had the biggest teenage pregnancy rate for decades - predominantly white teenage girls.
what does that have to do with anything? or are you implying that all female teenage girls who fall pregnant will not get a job, and will sponge and beg. 'cause that simply isn't the case.
Well then, turn that around- some immigrants come here to sponge and beg, but not all. Same thing, just about perceptions.
yup, but this thread isn't about immigrants as a whole, it's about 9 people. 9 people who took a plane load of hostiges and put there lives in danger. that takes planning, make the explosives, get the guns plan the hijack. if it was truely despiration then they wouldn't have had enough time to plan it. they were willing to put there lives in risk to pull it off, and possible end up killing a plane load of people in the process. it's a bit too selfish for my likeing.
what we really need is another australia.
Billy...Do they not get benefits? Are they refused benfits? How up to speed are you on the workings of the Hacienda here in Spain? As a tax and social security paying resident I might benefit from your knowledge? I was asking?
We've had the biggest teenage pregnancy rate for decades - predominantly white teenage girls.
what does that have to do with anything? or are you implying that all female teenage girls who fall pregnant will not get a job, and will sponge and beg. 'cause that simply isn't the case.
No but single mothers are predominantly one of the welfare systems main beneficiaries. Not to mention the nice council flat they get to go with it. :wink: :P
The point which you so elequantly missed is that while amarko was attributing these properties solely to immigrants or to seemingly most of them, hes missing the fact that that just isnt the case. That there are a lot of British people sponging and using the welfare state - which was the point of using that as an example.
Unless you'd dare to suggest child benefit to all these teenage mothers doesnt make a dent in the whole social security budget?
You know its funny how when it comes to raising a point like that, someone immediately jumps up and says Not everyone falls into that category. But the moment someone says all immigrants do, that line of reasoning goes out the window when quite categorically its a minority of immigrants that give the majority that come here to work and contribute a bad name.
Perhaps a little consistency and objectiveness would be nice.
northwind
10-05-06, 11:02 PM
But its ok for them to potentially participate (threaten) to murder.......!!
Of course it's not OK! But it's also not punishable by death... And the difference between threat and action is all the difference there needs to be.
21QUEST
10-05-06, 11:03 PM
Let's just put it this way Lyn 3 deaths in carlisle fairly recently. 2 were comitted by illegal imigrants and 1 by a "legal" immigrant.
..and how many crimes are committed each year by locals?
Cheers
Ben
as a matter of interest in the same period 1 and that was over the border in scotland still local but not in carlisle
so "but out" ben or do some research before replying :P :lol:
Now that made me really :lol: :smt043
Cheers
Ben
medwaysv
10-05-06, 11:04 PM
I think lyn has a point here to be fair, and I've probably missed it.
I do not agree under any circumstances with any state imposing the death penalty, whether it be Malaysia for drugs, or a US state for whatever. I simply don't agree with it, never have, never will. Two wrongs don't make a right.
So why should we be complicit in returning people to a country where they will face near certain death. I don't know that these people will face a sticky end there. But we should not facilitate it.
So a correct penalty? Life in jail. Deportation if safe to do so. Yes we end up paying, but so we do for so many other unworthies that clog up prison. Do a few more make that much difference? No I don't think so.
:shock: :shock: :shock:
vBulletin® , Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.