why did the government let them slip through the net :think:

Preach.

The two latest suspects arrested over the Parsons' Green bombing are asylum seekers.

Did we really expect otherwise?

well it wasn't going to happen, people were getting hysterical thinking they could slip though like this yadda yadda yadda ..who has egg on their face now :idc: I wish Kirk was here to see that what he was saying was right all along.

yep he did warn everyone

Exactly Cherry! Would like to see him back and listen to his words of wisdom again. Can't say I blame him for not wanting to though. Wrong side of the track so to speak. Too much hassle.

An article in the paper regarding another suspect actually stated that one resident said "he was a nice guy, he was very softly spoken. He used to condemn terrorism in front of my husband". Where have we heard that before?

I expect the next thing we will hear is they aren't really asylum seekers, just another media slur

Yes, let's judge an entire section of people with incomparable morals and situations just because we are scared of things that aren't white and/or British.

The only people that should face condemnation for terrorism are the terrorists who actually commit the crimes, to use the fact that two terrorists happened to be Asylum Seekers to make blanket statements against an incomparably diverse group of people is just sad.

Would the same standard apply to white people too? Would it be okay to suggest that anyone of a Right Wing persuasion should be viewed with suspicion and fear because of the actions of Thomas Mair? I'm guessing the answer is no to that....

You can't judge thousands of people for the actions of two.

Who ever said that it was impossible that terrorists could pose as asylum seekers? :facepalm: Rewriting history in order to pat yourselves on the back. Pretty sad :shrug:.

The point always was - and still is - that there being a possibility that people will abuse the system is not justification for throwing all genuine asylum seekers under the bus. What's so hard to understand about that?

Do you honestly expect any different at this point?

People who are scared and hateful will rewrite reality in a way that works for their confirmation bias.

It's considerably more than two in this incident alone, nevermind the other incidents. Is that another diversion tactic?

No that was never said, Kirk was always adamant he was speaking about the few but people like you continued to pretend not to understand and tarred him with the racist brush, just as you are doing here now.....what do you find so hard to understand about vetting and giving sanctuary to genuine refugees, you were one of the main proponents in let all the Calais lot come over, and I can find you posts if you really need me to

nah mate you have egg on your face because you said it was rubbish and that the open borders policy Germany adopted was great.

Oh OK sorry, economic migrants move from some beautiful countries to rat-infested London slums because Britain. It's not that they're struggling to get by financially in their own countries - in fact, jobs and money are ABUNDANT there, but Britain. Why wouldn't they want to live here? London. Britain and stuff. You know. Queen.

I mean why would anyone assume that economic migrants move here because of money, and really would rather stay in their home countries if they could make enough money there. Their countries are not Britain, so of course they would want to leave!

where are the rat infested slums pray? you only had to look at the migrant camp at Calais to see that the UK was the holy grail, they were in France they didn't want to stay with all the wine, grapes and french farmhouses, why was that?

Be my guest Cherie.

I got on fine with Kirk for the mostpart and the only time I ever called him racist was when he stated that people from the middle east are genetically predisposed to violence and that war is "in their blood". But by all means, if you can find these other posts where I said that we should "let all the Calais lot come over", then I suggest you do so before making false accusations. :hee:

It's common sense. You would not want to be seen as a representation of the extreme worst of your own demographic so why do you think it's okay to paint in broad strokes when it comes to races/religions/nationalities you hate?

If I was to take the statements you make and change the words so that they represent people of a right wing mindset you would flip your **** yet you are okay with doing exactly that to people who don't happen to be white.

You make plenty false accusations like accusing everyone who has a different opinion to you of being afraid of brown people, not nice is it being falsely accused, I can find those posts though unless of course they are deleted beforehand.:hee:

We covered this Cherie - it was because the French don't make good fish *& chips and also, Baby Prince George.

Obviously.

I mean I can't think of any other reason - such as the hope of potential economic prosperity - that any economic migrant would try to get into the UK. I mean, we KNOW it's not because they were struggling financially in their home country. LT said so. That ship has sailed. They were fine there and had loads of money but the magnificent Britain called out to them - like a siren through the fog - and they want to come here just because.

How about you stop blatantly making **** up to suit your argument? I doubt that I've ever commentated on Germany's open door policy so you can stop with your lies right there.

Stick to the facts, the ACTUAL facts, not the ones conjured up by your imagination.

I don't accuse "people who have a different opinion to me" of "being afraid of brown people" but you're free to find a post supporting that suggestion too, Cherie, though I know searching is probably difficult with such deep chips on your shoulders?

I have neither the time nor the inclination to go back through my posts deleting them so, as I said, go for it. Have fun; my posts are usually excellent so I can only imagine that reading through them will make for a fun-filled, if fruitless (because you won't find what you're looking for) - afternoon.

To be clear; what we're looking for is a post that is evidence that; "you were one of the main proponents in let all the Calais lot come over".

Go go go.

will you stick to facts, you continually accuse people of being afraid of brown people when you know nothing about them? not keen on being accused are you...diddums

cant be bothered, you can easily delete them.

You're not very good at this Cherie, tbh I'd suggest you should step off of the forum and calm down a bit; look over your posts again when you have a clearer head. This is sort of embarrassing :umm2:. I mean, I understand that you have an issue with people being accused of xenophobia / racism but... :shrug:... it does happen on here, in my opinion, and in the opinion of others, and I can't quite figure out why you're so keen for those opinions to be invalid?

When people are accused of racism on here, it's generally with a direct quote of the post that the accuser considers to be racist. You might disagree with that assessment but so what, it's not your opinion. You, on the other hand, are throwing out random accusations "about things that you're sure you remember people saying once maybe ages ago but the posts definitely exist and you'll go find them" - except that you wont - and that's a completely different situation.

Quote the posts alongside your opinion of those posts. It's simple enough. People might agree, they might disagree, or whatever, but until then, you're throwing around "he said she said" fantasies.

:facepalm:

I promise I don't care about this even vaguely enough to bother going back deleting posts :joker:.

Also; you can see the time/date that posts were edited to be deleted.

Sooo. Bonus points if you can find an old post in an old thread that I have edited or deleted more than 24 hours after the original post was made. You won't find one of those, either.