Re: ot: Gurkha immigration

Bear wrote:

I certainly wouldn't argue the point the the Gurkhas (note spelling)

Ouch.

<snip>

To bring asylum seekers into the equation totally fouls up the
argument.

Not really. I should have been more careful about what I said in my first
post, as I didn't intend to start a rant on asylum seekers. My point - and
the thing I am objecting to - is the inconsistency. We open our borders to
the Poles, the Romanians and whatever and - don't get me wrong here - this
may be a good thing. That is an entirely separate debate. And if I've made
it seem like a wog-bashing exercise, I have expressed myself badly, and I
retract it. My point is that you can't allow large numbers of foreign
nationals into the UK (for whatever reason) and then turn round and refuse
entry to an old and sick man who once willingly risked his life for you (and
was honoured for doing so by his contemporaries in the UK). It just seems
bloody mean and bureaucratic and not worthy of a supposedly-civilised
country.

If you go back and read my original post, you may be able to see that this
is what I was (rather hurriedly and clumsily) driving at.

--
Rich B
Bandit 1200S
Take out the obvious to email me.


.

Relevant Pages