Scandinavia and the World

Comments #9865861:

Too real 20 12, 7:47pm


You seem to not understand how to use the expression "to move the goal-post"?
Because I did nothing of the sort.

A). I certainly haven't got the impression you "detest the Tories" from what you've been writing - and I don't think anyone else have either (in the unlikely case anyone else have been reading much of what we've written).
I can't say I remember you mentioning the Tories much at all. It's just EU=Evil, UK=Good and not more nuance than that, from what I remember.

And I certainly don't remember you having anything negative to say about Boris when he was the golden boy of Brexiters. You undoubtedly voted for him and his "oven ready deal" - even if you might deny it now.

B). I was selective in that I answered your claim about you "pointing out that people 'fleeing' France were economic migrants" by focusing on the "economic migrant" claim - which I thought was the principle one you were making.
I proved to you that was wrong last we spoke - and yet you were back to claim the same point now.
And now that I've proved to you yet again that your claim is false, you apparently instead wish to focus on the part of them "'fleeing' France" as you put it.

Well, okay then - let's talk about that instead.
I proved that claim of yours was false as well, the last time we spoke - but I guess I have to refresh your memory on that point as well then:

There is no obligation for refugees to stay in France or any other country just because you would prefer so. Anyone is legally allowed to seek asylum in any nation, according to international law. Conversely, no one is forced to do so.

So again you're just repeating claims that are false and that I proved to you are false, last time we spoke.

C). No differance whatsoever - as I've showed you.
No one is forced to seek asylum anywhere, but everyone has the right to do so anywhere. That's international law, upheld by UK courts as well.

So what you wished would be the case is irrelevant - because that's not what the laws actually say.

"But to you the 1st case is Britain taking a decision so it must be evil and the 2nd the divine EU doing something so it must be OK."

No - that's what you're arguing - but in reverse.
What I actually wrote in my last comment was that it was equally immortal for both Britain AND the EU to try to stop refugees making asylum claims.

You can either agree with that - or you can claim NEITHER Britain NOR the EU is doing something immoral here - because they are both doing the same thing.

But your problem is that you're so stuck on EU=Evil, Britain=Good, that you're projecting that world view onto me as well - despite me expressly refuting it.
As I wrote in my last comment, I'm perfectly able to see when the EU does immoral things.
But that just didn't filter through your black and white world view.

"Unless your saying the same applies to when their in France the same can't be said for them insisting to move from France to the UK?"

Unclear what you even mean by this, but it's irrelevant, as the argument is flawed to begin with.
Refugees are, as previously stated, legally free to seek asylum wherever they want to - regardless of your views on that matter.
A right upheld by UK law as well.
And when they do seek asylum in Britain, the majority of them are granted asylum.

That's the truth here - not the fantasy you keep reposting.