RugbyRebels

caldeyrfc wrote:

gthedog wrote:

caldeyrfc wrote: You asked to be "Enlightened" So I did How the fvck thats playing the man not the ball god only knows
So do you agree with Katie and Allison or do you think what ever their views are now is not the time to say such things?

Today is not the day for it

Well you asked
Well it's another day now, so do you agree with the tweets of those 2 "women"

Schengen doesn't appear to be working though intelligence services in Belgium don't either. How do you propose we protect people from these sort of attacks?

gthedog wrote:

caldeyrfc wrote:

gthedog wrote: Today is not the day for it

Well you asked
Well it's another day now, so do you agree with the tweets of those 2 "women"

Schengen doesn't appear to be working though intelligence services in Belgium don't either. How do you propose we protect people from these sort of attacks?

How about answering the actual question

What "sort of" attacks?

They've been carried out by nationals of the countries that they've attacked haven't they?

Or do you want to start tagging muslims you.. just in case like?

Stooo wrote:What "sort of" attacks?

They've been carried out by nationals of the countries that they've attacked haven't they?

Or do you want to start tagging muslims you.. just in case like?

Their already doing that
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/ho ... 22211.html

caldeyrfc wrote:

Stooo wrote:What "sort of" attacks?

They've been carried out by nationals of the countries that they've attacked haven't they?

Or do you want to start tagging muslims you.. just in case like?

Their already doing that
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/ho ... 22211.html

Don't forget Wrist bands in Cardiff too.

Disgusting.

I'm surprised someone hasn't suggested building some sort of "camps" for them. Better safe than sorry after all.

Stooo wrote:What "sort of" attacks?

They've been carried out by nationals of the countries that they've attacked haven't they?

Or do you want to start tagging muslims you.. just in case like?

You actually think these are just disaffected Belgians?
I don't agree with tagging as I don't see how that will achieve anything but from the sound of it Belgium has a problem with parts their muslim community to say the least

Are you trying to say these people aren't Belgian?!?

Were the PAris Attackers not french?!?

Is it just these specific people who you want to strip of their nationality? Or is it all Muslims that you want to categorise as now being "Islamic State" ?!?



My point that you spectacularly missed in your bigotry is that schengen doesn't come into it AT ALL. So exiting the eu as some magic wand wouldn't have helped.

Stooo wrote:Are you trying to say these people aren't Belgian?!?

Were the PAris Attackers not french?!?

Is it just these specific people who you want to strip of their nationality? Or is it all Muslims that you want to categorise as now being "Islamic State" ?!?



My point that you spectacularly missed in your bigotry is that schengen doesn't come into it AT ALL. So exiting the eu as some magic wand wouldn't have helped.

It does.

The free movement of people and goods is a key issue, not so much the people but the goods. Many of the weapons used have originated from outside of the countries where attacks have taken place. Attacks in France have used weapons originating from the former Yugoslavia for example. Without border controls, it is far easier to move arms across Europe.

This doesn't undermine the fact that the attackers are home grown, but the lack of border controls makes it more difficult to intercept unlawful goods, such as weapons. Those same border controls would actually do little to stop the people, many of them have no criminal record, but the weapon movements are important.

Stooo wrote:Are you trying to say these people aren't Belgian?!?

Were the PAris Attackers not french?!?

Is it just these specific people who you want to strip of their nationality? Or is it all Muslims that you want to categorise as now being "Islamic State" ?!?



My point that you spectacularly missed in your bigotry is that schengen doesn't come into it AT ALL. So exiting the eu as some magic wand wouldn't have helped.

You do realise that France has shut its border and stopped 10,000 people crossing since the attacks in November don't you?
If being a bigot is preventing people who want to do harm being monitored or stopped from crossing borders after an attack on innocent people then sign me up

There are a number of articles referring to the movement of arms and ammunition across borders illegally. This one is as good any any of the others.

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/paris-attacks- ... es-1528834

gthedog wrote:

Stooo wrote:Are you trying to say these people aren't Belgian?!?

Were the PAris Attackers not french?!?

Is it just these specific people who you want to strip of their nationality? Or is it all Muslims that you want to categorise as now being "Islamic State" ?!?



My point that you spectacularly missed in your bigotry is that schengen doesn't come into it AT ALL. So exiting the eu as some magic wand wouldn't have helped.

You do realise that France has shut its border and stopped 10,000 people crossing since the attacks in November don't you?
If being a bigot is preventing people who want to do harm being monitored or stopped from crossing borders after an attack on innocent people then sign me up

The paris attack was commited by FRENCH NATIONALS.

The brussells attacks by BELGIANS.

What are you struggling with here?!?! They didn't cross any borders.

Stooo wrote:

gthedog wrote:

Stooo wrote:Are you trying to say these people aren't Belgian?!?

Were the PAris Attackers not french?!?

Is it just these specific people who you want to strip of their nationality? Or is it all Muslims that you want to categorise as now being "Islamic State" ?!?



My point that you spectacularly missed in your bigotry is that schengen doesn't come into it AT ALL. So exiting the eu as some magic wand wouldn't have helped.

You do realise that France has shut its border and stopped 10,000 people crossing since the attacks in November don't you?
If being a bigot is preventing people who want to do harm being monitored or stopped from crossing borders after an attack on innocent people then sign me up

The paris attack was commited by FRENCH NATIONALS.

The brussells attacks by BELGIANS.

What are you struggling with here?!?! They didn't cross any borders.

Do you want to go and check those facts especially the nationality of the guy that was arrested earlier this week? Think he was belgian born

Khalid and Brahim el-Bakraoui were belgian nationals yes.

Sandydragon wrote:

Stooo wrote:Are you trying to say these people aren't Belgian?!?

Were the PAris Attackers not french?!?

Is it just these specific people who you want to strip of their nationality? Or is it all Muslims that you want to categorise as now being "Islamic State" ?!?



My point that you spectacularly missed in your bigotry is that schengen doesn't come into it AT ALL. So exiting the eu as some magic wand wouldn't have helped.

It does.

The free movement of people and goods is a key issue, not so much the people but the goods. Many of the weapons used have originated from outside of the countries where attacks have taken place. Attacks in France have used weapons originating from the former Yugoslavia for example. Without border controls, it is far easier to move arms across Europe.

This doesn't undermine the fact that the attackers are home grown, but the lack of border controls makes it more difficult to intercept unlawful goods, such as weapons. Those same border controls would actually do little to stop the people, many of them have no criminal record, but the weapon movements are important.

I don't think we are in any position to take the moral high ground on arms production and export

caldeyrfc wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:

Stooo wrote:Are you trying to say these people aren't Belgian?!?

Were the PAris Attackers not french?!?

Is it just these specific people who you want to strip of their nationality? Or is it all Muslims that you want to categorise as now being "Islamic State" ?!?



My point that you spectacularly missed in your bigotry is that schengen doesn't come into it AT ALL. So exiting the eu as some magic wand wouldn't have helped.

It does.

The free movement of people and goods is a key issue, not so much the people but the goods. Many of the weapons used have originated from outside of the countries where attacks have taken place. Attacks in France have used weapons originating from the former Yugoslavia for example. Without border controls, it is far easier to move arms across Europe.

This doesn't undermine the fact that the attackers are home grown, but the lack of border controls makes it more difficult to intercept unlawful goods, such as weapons. Those same border controls would actually do little to stop the people, many of them have no criminal record, but the weapon movements are important.

I don't think we are in any position to take the moral high ground on arms production and export

Im not suggesting that we take any moral high ground. However, what you are referring to is the legal (note I don't write moral) sale of arms to authorized third parties, where there is a clear end user certificate. It excites considerable debate, but it is legal.

The issue Im referring to is the illegal movement of arms and ammunition across Europe that is largely unhindered. The 2 things are very different and if we want to have a discussion on whether Schengen makes us more or less safe, then you have to consider that the movement of contraband across EU borders is now a lot easier than it used to be. Thats not to say that the EU sharing of data on terrorist suspect doesn't counter balance that, but its not a coincidence that many authorities are indicating that the weapons used in the France attacks came from Eastern Europe. Its too early yet in this investigation, but it will be interesting to see where the explosives used originated.

Sandydragon wrote:

caldeyrfc wrote:

Sandydragon wrote: It does.

The free movement of people and goods is a key issue, not so much the people but the goods. Many of the weapons used have originated from outside of the countries where attacks have taken place. Attacks in France have used weapons originating from the former Yugoslavia for example. Without border controls, it is far easier to move arms across Europe.

This doesn't undermine the fact that the attackers are home grown, but the lack of border controls makes it more difficult to intercept unlawful goods, such as weapons. Those same border controls would actually do little to stop the people, many of them have no criminal record, but the weapon movements are important.

I don't think we are in any position to take the moral high ground on arms production and export

Im not suggesting that we take any moral high ground. However, what you are referring to is the legal (note I don't write moral) sale of arms to authorized third parties, where there is a clear end user certificate. It excites considerable debate, but it is legal.

The issue Im referring to is the illegal movement of arms and ammunition across Europe that is largely unhindered. The 2 things are very different and if we want to have a discussion on whether Schengen makes us more or less safe, then you have to consider that the movement of contraband across EU borders is now a lot easier than it used to be. Thats not to say that the EU sharing of data on terrorist suspect doesn't counter balance that, but its not a coincidence that many authorities are indicating that the weapons used in the France attacks came from Eastern Europe. Its too early yet in this investigation, but it will be interesting to see where the explosives used originated.

Of course guns that have been manufactured in this country have NEVER found their way into terrorist hands or been used against us or our allies.

caldeyrfc wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:

caldeyrfc wrote: I don't think we are in any position to take the moral high ground on arms production and export

Im not suggesting that we take any moral high ground. However, what you are referring to is the legal (note I don't write moral) sale of arms to authorized third parties, where there is a clear end user certificate. It excites considerable debate, but it is legal.

The issue Im referring to is the illegal movement of arms and ammunition across Europe that is largely unhindered. The 2 things are very different and if we want to have a discussion on whether Schengen makes us more or less safe, then you have to consider that the movement of contraband across EU borders is now a lot easier than it used to be. Thats not to say that the EU sharing of data on terrorist suspect doesn't counter balance that, but its not a coincidence that many authorities are indicating that the weapons used in the France attacks came from Eastern Europe. Its too early yet in this investigation, but it will be interesting to see where the explosives used originated.

Of course guns that have been manufactured in this country have NEVER found their way into terrorist hands or been used against us or our allies.

Did I say that? Are you suggesting that I am blaming the country of production for this, because Im not. The arms would, most likely, have been supplied by the Soviet Union to its Warsaw Pact allies. Nothing wrong with that on any legal basis. However, since the fall of the USSR and the events in the former Yugoslavia, there is a glut of weaponry from Eastern European countries that has found its way onto the black market. That weaponry can find its way to Western Europe.

Im not sure what your issue is with this, you seem to be heading off on a tangent - its not the manufacturers fault that the weapons found their way to France. The point I am making, is that the lack of border controls within the EU makes this easier than it used to be.

Sandydragon wrote:

caldeyrfc wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:
Im not suggesting that we take any moral high ground. However, what you are referring to is the legal (note I don't write moral) sale of arms to authorized third parties, where there is a clear end user certificate. It excites considerable debate, but it is legal.

The issue Im referring to is the illegal movement of arms and ammunition across Europe that is largely unhindered. The 2 things are very different and if we want to have a discussion on whether Schengen makes us more or less safe, then you have to consider that the movement of contraband across EU borders is now a lot easier than it used to be. Thats not to say that the EU sharing of data on terrorist suspect doesn't counter balance that, but its not a coincidence that many authorities are indicating that the weapons used in the France attacks came from Eastern Europe. Its too early yet in this investigation, but it will be interesting to see where the explosives used originated.

Of course guns that have been manufactured in this country have NEVER found their way into terrorist hands or been used against us or our allies.

Did I say that? Are you suggesting that I am blaming the country of production for this, because Im not. The arms would, most likely, have been supplied by the Soviet Union to its Warsaw Pact allies. Nothing wrong with that on any legal basis. However, since the fall of the USSR and the events in the former Yugoslavia, there is a glut of weaponry from Eastern European countries that has found its way onto the black market. That weaponry can find its way to Western Europe.

Im not sure what your issue is with this, you seem to be heading off on a tangent - its not the manufacturers fault that the weapons found their way to France. The point I am making, is that the lack of border controls within the EU makes this easier than it used to be.

yep.. allthose blood immigrants strolling across the border with rpgs and aks strapped to their backs

Stooo wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:

caldeyrfc wrote: Of course guns that have been manufactured in this country have NEVER found their way into terrorist hands or been used against us or our allies.

Did I say that? Are you suggesting that I am blaming the country of production for this, because Im not. The arms would, most likely, have been supplied by the Soviet Union to its Warsaw Pact allies. Nothing wrong with that on any legal basis. However, since the fall of the USSR and the events in the former Yugoslavia, there is a glut of weaponry from Eastern European countries that has found its way onto the black market. That weaponry can find its way to Western Europe.

Im not sure what your issue is with this, you seem to be heading off on a tangent - its not the manufacturers fault that the weapons found their way to France. The point I am making, is that the lack of border controls within the EU makes this easier than it used to be.

yep.. allthose blood immigrants strolling across the border with rpgs and aks strapped to their backs

Nice hyperbole. This might be an inconvenient truth and it doesn't detract from your home grown argument, but the assault rifles used in the Paris attacks came from outside the country. The current EU lack of border controls helped make that easier. You don't find solutions to this problem by ignoring the arguments.

What about the current checks to goods that are already being smuggled would change suddenly if we left the EU?

Stooo wrote:What about the current checks to goods that are already being smuggled would change suddenly if we left the EU?

The checks on goods now are nothing compared to what they used to be when ever nation had its own border controls. The reason for getting rid of them was to speed up the movement of goods, which works equally well for illegal goods as well as legitimate commerce.

Britain could instal whatever border controls it wanted outside of the EU. But thats a side issue, since we aren't the ones getting attacked, despite a home grown problem. Geography makes it far harder to smuggle contraband into the UK.

For the mainland EU nations, they don't have that advantage. The last time I drove across an EU border, there were no checks of luggage what so ever. Smuggling in those circumstances is child's play.

The idea that putting a couple of check points across a few roads while blocking others will stop people who mean harm is truly laughable We have some of the most strictest border controls in Europe and yet, if we were to believe some, we are being overrun by by illegal immigrants and lets not start on how all the drugs come into this country

caldeyrfc wrote:The idea that putting a couple of check points across a few roads while blocking others will stop people who mean harm is truly laughable We have some of the most strictest border controls in Europe and yet, if we were to believe some, we are being overrun by by illegal immigrants and lets not start on how all the drugs come into this country

And yet the discussion is about a Belgian national who made the bombs that detonated in Paris and hopefully doing something to take back control of a porous situation that isn't working particularly well
You're mixing apples and oranges to suit your argument just for a change

Look to the war on drugs in the US for an example of a failure of hard-arse immigration policy and fences/borders. Something more nuanced is needed. Locking up Tony Blair for war crimes would be a wonderful show of solidarity with the people he got bombed back to the stone age.

gthedog wrote:

caldeyrfc wrote:The idea that putting a couple of check points across a few roads while blocking others will stop people who mean harm is truly laughable We have some of the most strictest border controls in Europe and yet, if we were to believe some, we are being overrun by by illegal immigrants and lets not start on how all the drugs come into this country

And yet the discussion is about a Belgian national who made the bombs that detonated in Paris and hopefully doing something to take back control of a porous situation that isn't working particularly well
You're mixing apples and oranges to suit your argument just for a change

Says the man who refuses to answer a simple question