machete killer who butchered 400 people in his homeland can stay in UK on benefits

[RDM]

We can always opt out it is called "European Convention on Human Rights" another good reason to leave the eu.

ECHR isn't an EU thing...

 

[manic111]

We can always opt out it is called "European Convention on Human Rights" another good reason to leave the eu.

Never had these human rights when I was younger we used to kick **** like that out in a heart beat.

Leaving the EU won't remove us from the ECHR, they're different bodies.

 

[kwerk]

Think about it this way though, that's 400 less potential immigrants.

 

[sports_brah]

Think about it this way though, that's 400 less potential immigrants.

Is it wrong that I laughed?

 

[Skillmister]

Think about it this way though, that's 400 less potential immigrants.

Bravery level: kwerk

 

[anything I don't mind]

I know it is the Daily Mail but did you even read the article before blaming the government?

I don't need to read the article before blaming the government.

 

[RDM]

I don't need to read the article before blaming the government.

Well obviously not as fact isn't really all that high on your list of required traits in a story...

 

[elmarko]

Well obviously not as fact isn't really all that high on your list of required traits in a story...

It's his 'style'.

To quote Stewart Lee

"I don't like facts, they tend to cloud my judgement - I prefer to reply on instinct & blind prejudice"

 

[deuse]

Aren't you the chap that protest votes for the BNP?

If you mean use a party as a protest vote then yes. who doesn't

ECHR isn't an EU thing...

Leaving the EU won't remove us from the ECHR, they're different bodies.

Well we should leave both imop. But if anyone here thinks he should stay then speak up
and I will tell the Gov to move him next door to you

 

[manic111]

I think we should stay.

The ECHR is a group of countries who have agreed to abide by high moral standards. Funnily enough, this includes not allowing people to be deported and executed. I'd like to believe (although this seems to get tested a lot) that most people in the UK are good enough to understand that these moral standards are something to strive for, not to shy away from when they become difficult.

The EU has detriments and benefits. I believe that there is too much red tape and that some of the rules, particularly on restrictions of free movement of goods, are too stringent. However, access to the single market and to various EU-based financial institutions are too important to our economy to lose. I believe that the EU needs to change, but that we are not in a strong bargaining position to drive change.

 

[elmarko]

I think we should stay.

The ECHR is a group of countries who have agreed to abide by high moral standards. Funnily enough, this includes not allowing people to be deported and executed. I'd like to believe (although this seems to get tested a lot) that most people in the UK are good enough to understand that these moral standards are something to strive for, not to shy away from when they become difficult.

The EU has detriments and benefits. I believe that there is too much red tape and that some of the rules, particularly on restrictions of free movement of goods, are too stringent. However, access to the single market and to various EU-based financial institutions are too important to our economy to lose. I believe that the EU needs to change, but that we are not in a strong bargaining position to drive change.

Indeed.

People also only seem to focus on these ridiculous statistical anomalies when viewing the EU & think that because we have been unable to deport two people - the entire treaty should be scrapped.

It's the kind of argument you would expect from a massive idiot.

 

[manic111]

Indeed.

People also only seem to focus on these ridiculous statistical anomalies when viewing the EU & think that because we have been unable to deport two people - the entire treaty should be scrapped.

It's the kind of argument you would expect from a massive idiot.

In fairness, there is a lot of EU law you can look at and jump to conclusions from. The "Buy Irish" case, for instance, in which Ireland was prevented from running a promotional campaign for its own products as it, in turn, would restrict movement of goods from other member states. I can understand arguments from that to the "we should leave the EU" conclusion.

It still ignores the fact that the economy would be in bigger trouble without the EU though.

 

[anything I don't mind]

Quite a good video on the human rights act. I think the asylum laws are ridiculous and the government and border agencies are full of ****. They could easily just deport someone if they wanted, what is any other country going to do about it? They are just weak and like the idea of not having take any responsibility for anything, they can just let criminals in and blame the eu.

 

[RDM]

I believe that the EU needs to change, but that we are not in a strong bargaining position to drive change.

What if the change that occurs starts to become more and more detrimental to the UK? It is already pretty obvious that several of the key European players want to curb London significantly for example. If we cannot drive change, do we have to accept it instead?

It's the kind of argument you would expect from a massive idiot.

I am starting to come to the conclusion that your definition of "idiot" is "Anyone that disagrees with me!"

 

[Judgeneo]

Lol Daily Mail. The Coventry Telegraph has a better article.

http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/coventry-news/machete-killer-granted-asylum-living-3874727

He told an immigration court in London that he was a senior member of the Mungiki in a Nairobi slum after being recruited when he was just 10-years-old.

In 2000 he was promoted to leader, training members and taking control of the slum where he ran a security racket.

...


Initially they were a peaceful protest *movement in which followers wore dreadlocks, but the group transformed into one of the most feared organised crime organisations in the capital, Nairobi.

One neighbour said: “It’s frightening when you think about it and that he lived just next door.

“We would just say hello now and again. I remember he used to come around at odd times. But he kept a very low profile.”

Another resident said: “I wondered why he was moving.

“I would speak to him and say hello. He seemed alright. But I think it’s wrong.

http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/coventry-news/neighbourhood-shock-over-mass-killer-3902200

 

[manic111]

What if the change that occurs starts to become more and more detrimental to the UK? It is already pretty obvious that several of the key European players want to curb London significantly for example. If we cannot drive change, do we have to accept it instead?

It depends on the changes. If it gets to a stage where the detriment outweighs the benefit, then we leave.

 

[Judgeneo]

Sounds like hes settled down and is now living a peaceful life.
We've got worse people living in the city.

 

[elmarko]

I am starting to come to the conclusion that your definition of "idiot" is "Anyone that disagrees with me!"

Not really, my definition in that case was related to people who use statistical anomalies & apply them to the entire population - then believe that to be a logical way of forming opinions.

 

[deuse]

Sounds like hes settled down and is now living a peaceful life.
We've got worse people living in the city.

Really? Can you name this person who has killed over 400 people and lives in the city?
And you won't mind if the gov move him next to you?

 

[RDM]

It depends on the changes. If it gets to a stage where the detriment outweighs the benefit, then we leave.

Which makes it somewhat a subjective rather than objective position. The economic hardship on leaving the EU may be seen as worth it if you value the increase in sovereignty for example.