@divegeester said
On this point; why is it every EU country of which they have travelled to and have applied for asylum in, has rejected them?

That would be one country within the Schengen arrangement will have rejected them.
And that, I presume, will be on an individual basis.

Sending them to Rwanda???

Well, this is one for the books.
The UK is paying Rwanda, a country the UK itself has criticised for its lack of human rights, 250 million pounds and a further 150.000 pounds per refugee, to accept asylum seekers who “illegally” enter Britain.

It will cost the British tax payer 63.000 pounds per refugee more than keeping the refugee in Britain.

It’s obviously a scheme that’s going to be short-lived, but do you think it’s acceptable?

Is it morally okay to send asylum seekers to third countries to be processed and live (they can’t return to Britain)?

And if so, is changing the law to make said third-party country “a safe country” in anyway acceptable?

https://www.bbc.com/news/explainers-61782866

In November 2023, the UK Supreme Court ruled unanimously that the Rwanda scheme was unlawful.
It said genuine refugees would be at risk of being returned to their home countries, where they could face harm.
This breaches the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), which prohibits torture and inhuman treatment. The UK is a signatory to the ECHR.

After the Supreme Court ruled that the scheme was unlawful, the government introduced a bill to make clear in UK law that Rwanda is a safe country.

The legislation - which was finally approved on 22 April after intense political wrangling - orders the courts to ignore key sections of the Human Rights Act.
It also compels the courts to disregard other British laws or international rules - such as the international Refugee Convention - which would block deportations to Rwanda.
The UK government also signed a new migration treaty with Rwanda, which Home Secretary James Cleverly said guarantees that anyone sent there would not risk being returned to their home country.

@rajk999 said
What does Muslims in your area have to do with Islamic extremists killing, raping and kidnapping Jews?

Nothing.
And that’s the point. Your islamophobia bunches them altogether.

@mott-the-hoople said
I can prove both, so what’s your point?

The only way you can “prove” both automatically means the democratic party now is different to the democratic party then.

But, because you think it’s relevant, my point is that you are an idiot.

@moonbus said
Yes.

The defense is that they were backups just in case a legal challenge to the result of the election were to have succeeded. The prosecution says, no, it wasn't that at all--they were going to try to get Pence to use the fake electors' votes instead of the genuine ones all along, but Pence didn't play along with it.

Instead of voter ID, America should implement elector ID.

Republicans would be scary if they weren’t that stupid.

They’re the Dr. Doofenschmirtzes of politics.

My God.

Are these fake electors the same “alternative” electors republicans here have been saying “is a thing”?

Crazy world the US of A.

@mott-the-hoople said
why do you call me an idiot for posting a historically accurate statement?

Because you connect a political party’s policies from 100 years ago to the policies today.

On one hand you are claiming democrats = KKK, on the other hand you are claiming democrats = woke.

So, you see, you are an idiot.

@rajk999 said
Islam is a genocidal religion
Islam teaches its followers to convert or kill.
Muslims are the maniacs.

All smart people are islamophobic.
The fools are not

Listen to yourself.

Christianity teaches to turn the other cheek… yet how many wars and murders have taken place because of Christianity?

Have you ever even met a moslim?

Hey… and do you know that Iraq, Iran and the Palestinians were generally open to all religions and reasonably secular until the West got involved?

Look in the mirror, before judging others, my racist little fukkwad.

@rajk999 said
Israel does not need help. They have enough.

So the US can stop funding their ethnic cleansing regime?

@averagejoe1 said
Major provisions of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 are scheduled to expire at the end of 2025.

https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/biden-vows-let-trump-era-tax-cuts-expire-next-year-meaning-higher-rates-millions

This means that Biden breaks his promise that he will not raise taxes on those making less than $400k. It is all here.
No opinion from AvJoe. Higher rates for, well, you.

So, because something is scheduled to expire, you’re stating that the current president is increasing taxes?

Isn’t it the president who set the expiration date the one who is raising these taxes?

Oh the irony… the extreme right worried about Jews.

@wajoma said
Shag doody for brains you forgot one of the attributes of race, your criminal record lol.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KR8RX4fK34E

Your ignorant interpretation of racism is laughable.

Racism is a wider concept than race. Live with it.

Fukking retard.

@wajoma said
Race doesn't come into pseud boy.

I'm impervious to you're worn out, tatty race card shag doody, it's powerless against me.

Islam is not a race.

Fukking retard.
Everyone knows Jews aren’t a race, yet antisemitism is classified as racism.

It’s the same rubbish point you’ve brought up before and been bitch-slapped about many times: racism is not about race. It’s about discrimination based on various attributes: race, religion, ethnicity, facial features, language, etc.

@wajoma said
1/ Exactly what I said, hamas numbers, you're repeating the propaganda of the religious fanatics for them.

I’m repeating international health organisation numbers. You’re repeating the racist trope that you can’t trust Islamic hewlth authorities.

@wajoma said
1/ They're hamas numbers then.

Hamas and international agency numbers.
Basically health authorities give numbers and international organisations verify them.