switchlogic:
I forgot, Carryfast knows all. Everything is black and white in the old Carryfast world.
I gave up earlier on. Even when we agreed on the same thing he was determined to argue about asylum seekers or not. and I had the audacity to mention a treaty Britain hadnt signed and that set him off as well 
Blah blah blah. Carryfast, the font of all knowledge speaks again. Everyone sit up an listen, the Oracle is speaking
The-Snowman:
switchlogic:
I forgot, Carryfast knows all. Everything is black and white in the old Carryfast world.I gave up earlier on. Even when we agreed on the same thing he was determined to argue about asylum seekers or not. and I had the audacity to mention a treaty Britain hadnt signed and that set him off as well
The problem is he could start an argument in an empty room. Or one containing his mother, the only woman heâs ever lived with 
Though the only woman Iâve ever lived with is my mother so maybe weâre equal
The-Snowman:
switchlogic:
I forgot, Carryfast knows all. Everything is black and white in the old Carryfast world.I gave up earlier on. Even when we agreed on the same thing he was determined to argue about asylum seekers or not. and I had the audacity to mention a treaty Britain hadnt signed and that set him off as well
The only argument in that case being whatâs the relevance of any âtreatyâ with the EU which we might or might not have signed.Especially assuming that we havenât signed any treaty that would stop us from deporting illegal immigrants on an immediate summary no appeals basis.Let alone when our own Navy is helping them to get here.Or are you suggesting that Cameron has refused to sign a treaty which âwouldâ allow us to deport them.In which case why the reference to so called âleft wingersâ bearing in mind that the open door immigration policy is made up of an alliance of both Socialism and the CBI cheap labour agendas. 
On that note the most recent EU idea is all about letting them in not stopping them.Then spreading them across the EU on the basis of those whoâve already taken the most and highly populated countries ( like us ) take the most.
switchlogic:
The-Snowman:
switchlogic:
I forgot, Carryfast knows all. Everything is black and white in the old Carryfast world.I gave up earlier on. Even when we agreed on the same thing he was determined to argue about asylum seekers or not. and I had the audacity to mention a treaty Britain hadnt signed and that set him off as well
The problem is he could start an argument in an empty room. Or one containing his mother, the only woman heâs ever lived with
Iâm suprised he rattle a man such as you to this level . I got annoyed with him once for just the same frustrating reasons but found it hard to continue being annoyed as he never bites back, heâs always pleasant 
. â â â â his pleasantness! Probably a very nice bloke, just wasnât born with ears (figurative ears in this case!). Heâs one of those guys whoâs having a conversation with himself, never engages directly with what you ask or say. Really frustrating.
Freight Dog:
Iâm suprised he rattle a man such as you to this level
I have listened.He said that he heard a story on the radio which says that shipâs captains are bringing in illegal immigrants instead of returning them to place of departure.Because they are âscaredâ of them.I said âifâ thatâs true how does the government explain the navy doing the same.
Feel free to explain what Iâve heard wrong.
Carryfast:
Freight Dog:
Iâm suprised he rattle a man such as you to this levelI have listened.He said that he heard a story on the radio which says that shipâs captains are bringing in illegal immigrants instead of returning them to place of departure.Because they are âscaredâ of them.I said âifâ thatâs true how does the government explain the navy doing the same.
Feel free to explain what Iâve heard wrong.
Ok CF. I must admit Iâve not been following your discussion with Luke. Fair play, you seem to have put your point across succinctly. Shame you didnât do that in the first place.
I just struggle to keep up with what youâre on about half the time. You loose me in the text. I have to be honest. I donât think Iâm alone with this. You have a peculiarly frustrating way of when asked something, not getting to the point and instead taking it as an opportunity to ramble on more and lecture us. Itâs like us viewers pressing âplayâ on a podcast. Only when we start getting frustrated do you talk directly. Just saying, I have to be honest. Iâm sorry mate. Youâd get us all on side if we could communicate with you directly.
Carryfast:
The-Snowman:
switchlogic:
I forgot, Carryfast knows all. Everything is black and white in the old Carryfast world.I gave up earlier on. Even when we agreed on the same thing he was determined to argue about asylum seekers or not. and I had the audacity to mention a treaty Britain hadnt signed and that set him off as well
The only argument in that case being whatâs the relevance of any âtreatyâ with the EU which we might or might not have signed.Especially assuming that we havenât signed any treaty that would stop us from deporting illegal immigrants on an immediate summary no appeals basis.Let alone when our own Navy is helping them to get here.Or are you suggesting that Cameron has refused to sign a treaty which âwouldâ allow us to deport them.In which case why the reference to so called âleft wingersâ bearing in mind that the open door immigration policy is made up of an alliance of both Socialism and the CBI cheap labour agendas.
On that note the most recent EU idea is all about letting them in not stopping them.Then spreading them across the EU on the basis of those whoâve already taken the most and highly populated countries ( like us ) take the most.
I wasnt suggesting anything. It was something I heard FFS. Im sorry I mentioned it now.
The ironic thing is CF,we both feel the same about immigration but your SOOOOOO determined to be right you cant even see it
Freight Dog:
Carryfast:
Freight Dog:
Iâm suprised he rattle a man such as you to this levelI have listened.He said that he heard a story on the radio which says that shipâs captains are bringing in illegal immigrants instead of returning them to place of departure.Because they are âscaredâ of them.I said âifâ thatâs true how does the government explain the navy doing the same.
Feel free to explain what Iâve heard wrong.
Ok CF. I must admit Iâve not been following your discussion with Luke. Fair play, you seem to have put your point across succinctly. Shame you didnât do that in the first place.
I just struggle to keep up with what youâre on about half the time. You loose me in the text. I have to be honest. I donât think Iâm alone with this. You have a peculiarly frustrating way of when asked something, not getting to the point and instead taking it as an opportunity to ramble on more and lecture us. Itâs like us viewers pressing âplayâ on a podcast. Only when we start getting frustrated do you talk directly. Just saying, I have to be honest. Iâm sorry mate. Youâd get us all on side if we could communicate with you directly.
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=126846#p1979549
theguardian.com/uk-news/2015 ⌠on-delayed
Let em drown because Cameron wants to take them to Italy for onward travel to Calais and here.Instead of Alexandria or Tangier. 
The-Snowman:
Carryfast:
The-Snowman:
switchlogic:
I forgot, Carryfast knows all. Everything is black and white in the old Carryfast world.I gave up earlier on. Even when we agreed on the same thing he was determined to argue about asylum seekers or not. and I had the audacity to mention a treaty Britain hadnt signed and that set him off as well
The only argument in that case being whatâs the relevance of any âtreatyâ with the EU which we might or might not have signed.Especially assuming that we havenât signed any treaty that would stop us from deporting illegal immigrants on an immediate summary no appeals basis.Let alone when our own Navy is helping them to get here.Or are you suggesting that Cameron has refused to sign a treaty which âwouldâ allow us to deport them.In which case why the reference to so called âleft wingersâ bearing in mind that the open door immigration policy is made up of an alliance of both Socialism and the CBI cheap labour agendas.
On that note the most recent EU idea is all about letting them in not stopping them.Then spreading them across the EU on the basis of those whoâve already taken the most and highly populated countries ( like us ) take the most.
I wasnt suggesting anything. It was something I heard FFS. Im sorry I mentioned it now.
The ironic thing is CF,we both feel the same about immigration but your SOOOOOO determined to be right you cant even see it
To be fair who needs the EU or âleft wingersâ when itâs Cameron and the Cons who are at least as much of the problem.Which was my point.Which means if the electorate had the sense to stop going for easy stereotypes of left v right weâd probably now have been in the position of a UKIP balance of power administration.Then at least an agreement with Italy to shut the Mediterranean door by sending back immigrants to North Africa instead of helping to bring them in.
switchlogic:
No, you never listen and you only belive what you want. Beside the definition of ignorant is a picture of you. Well it would be, if you actually had the balls to put your own face to your opinions. But you donât. So hey ho
Haw haw, is it fair to say you arenât enjoying CF in full flow then?
Harry Monk:
Carryfast:
Iâd say that itâs you who isnât exactly bright+1, Iâve often wondered why he wades into threads when he doesnât have a clue what people are talking about.
Hahahahaha, Carry & Harry should team up. I suggest the name Team Bigot. Whadya think ladies?
Freight Dog:
Iâm suprised he rattle a man such as you to this level
BillyHunt:
switchlogic:
No, you never listen and you only belive what you want. Beside the definition of ignorant is a picture of you. Well it would be, if you actually had the balls to put your own face to your opinions. But you donât. So hey hoHaw haw, is it fair to say you arenât enjoying CF in full flow then?
No. I tend not to get involved in any discussions involving him anymore but I heard the interview with the ships captain and thought it pertinant to the discussion. What got me was I was simply presenting a fact, what a man said on the radio, and offered no personal opinion at all yet Carry still just keeps ranting and ranting and ranting telling me Iâm wrong. Heâs got so bad I donât read his posts anymore. You donât even have to see the name, one sentence is enough to tell itâs him. Heâs become a parody of himself
The problem they think (and they are right) London is paved with gold and it is. They come from a place where they are starving and abused on a daily basis to a country that will feed them and give them money, which in their eyes is a fortune.
The whole lot should have been sent back on the next ship to Belgium and the shipping line fined lots on money. They werenât and shipping line wonât be.
switchlogic:
No. I tend not to get involved in any discussions involving him anymore but I heard the interview with the ships captain and thought it pertinant to the discussion. What got me was I was simply presenting a fact, what a man said on the radio, and offered no personal opinion at all yet Carry still just keeps ranting and ranting and ranting telling me Iâm wrong. Heâs got so bad I donât read his posts anymore. You donât even have to see the name, one sentence is enough to tell itâs him. Heâs become a parody of himself
You donât read my posts and yet you keep on moaning about what Iâve written obviously without having the slightest clue what youâre moaning about because you donât even know what I wrote.
Which figures because ironically in this case I wasnât telling âyouâ anything at all.I was referring to what âthe Captainâ supposedly said on that typically biased pro immigration pro establishment âparodyâ of a so called âunbiasedâ broadcasting media provider.
While âifâ it was unbiased then it obviously would/could have asked the inconvenient question as to,âifâ merchant ships are bringing illegal immigrants in,because their crews are supposedly âscaredâ of immigrants on board kicking off if they donât.Why is it that military ships are doing exactly the same thing.Bearing in mind that no Captain of a military ship is going to put it at risk of take over by a load of pished off immigrants when they get told to get below decks and then zb off down the gang plank after docking in Egypt. 
zaax:
The problem they think (and they are right) London is paved with gold and it is. They come to a country that will feed them and give them money, which in their eyes is a fortune.The whole lot should have been sent back on the next ship to Belgium
Which leaves the obvious question of why is it that the government is implementing a policy of the former instead of the latter.Or for that matter why is the Royal Navy being given orders to pick them up off the North African coast and then bring them to Italy,Where we just know that most of them will end up on the North European coast wanting to cross to here.The obvious answer being the usual alliance of Socialism and the demand for cheap labour.
Carryfast:
switchlogic:
No. I tend not to get involved in any discussions involving him anymore but I heard the interview with the ships captain and thought it pertinant to the discussion. What got me was I was simply presenting a fact, what a man said on the radio, and offered no personal opinion at all yet Carry still just keeps ranting and ranting and ranting telling me Iâm wrong. Heâs got so bad I donât read his posts anymore. You donât even have to see the name, one sentence is enough to tell itâs him. Heâs become a parody of himselfYou donât read my posts and yet you keep on moaning about what Iâve written obviously without having the slightest clue what youâre moaning about because you donât even know what I wrote.
Which figures because ironically in this case I wasnât telling âyouâ anything at all.I was referring to what âthe Captainâ supposedly said on that typically biased pro immigration pro establishment âparodyâ of a so called âunbiasedâ broadcasting media provider.
While âifâ it was unbiased then it obviously would/could have asked the inconvenient question as to,âifâ merchant ships are bringing illegal immigrants in,because their crews are supposedly âscaredâ of immigrants on board kicking off if they donât.Why is it that military ships are doing exactly the same thing.Bearing in mind that no Captain of a military ship is going to put it at risk of take over by a load of pished off immigrants when they get told to get below decks and then zb off down the gang plank after docking in Egypt.
Blah blah blah blah. Off he goes again.
Just a guess but Iâd say the royal navy captain is picking up these illegal immigrants as thatâs what his orders are.
Iâd imagine the chief admiral back in London would be most annoyed if the captain started machine gunning them.
switchlogic:
Carryfast:
switchlogic:
No. I tend not to get involved in any discussions involving him anymore but I heard the interview with the ships captain and thought it pertinant to the discussion. What got me was I was simply presenting a fact, what a man said on the radio, and offered no personal opinion at all yet Carry still just keeps ranting and ranting and ranting telling me Iâm wrong. Heâs got so bad I donât read his posts anymore. You donât even have to see the name, one sentence is enough to tell itâs him. Heâs become a parody of himselfYou donât read my posts and yet you keep on moaning about what Iâve written obviously without having the slightest clue what youâre moaning about because you donât even know what I wrote.
Which figures because ironically in this case I wasnât telling âyouâ anything at all.I was referring to what âthe Captainâ supposedly said on that typically biased pro immigration pro establishment âparodyâ of a so called âunbiasedâ broadcasting media provider.
While âifâ it was unbiased then it obviously would/could have asked the inconvenient question as to,âifâ merchant ships are bringing illegal immigrants in,because their crews are supposedly âscaredâ of immigrants on board kicking off if they donât.Why is it that military ships are doing exactly the same thing.Bearing in mind that no Captain of a military ship is going to put it at risk of take over by a load of pished off immigrants when they get told to get below decks and then zb off down the gang plank after docking in Egypt.
Well I obviously read your bloody replies to me, do keep up. The fact is you misunderstood me and thought I was talking navy ships and when I pointed out I wasnât you just do your usual trick of drowning everyone out with your incessant droning rather than admit you misunderstood.
I didnât mis understand anything.Firstly,as I said,Iâve got my doubts about âthe Captainâsâ excuses bearing in mind the naval shipping question.While secondly Iâve got no doubt as to why that bastion of the pro immigration cause didnât raise the same question.
Having said I would be prepared to believe that just maybe the Captain knows something that the BBC doesnât.IE the âimmigrantsâ in question are highly likely to have an ISIS connection.In which case it seems obvious that not only should the government be rounded up on charges of treason over handing the place over to the EU but also for crimes regarding putting national security at risk. 
While we all know itâs â â â â â â â â , theyâre claiming to be asylum seekers. So the navy have done the sensible thing and dumped them on Italy, the nearest âsafeâ country. If they were returned to Africa, weâd be in breach of a load of eu bull crap. The sooner weâre out of it and can govern ourselves, the better