by Suff » 02 May 2016, 08:49
My position is totally different and always has been. We have a moral duty to stop this influx of children to the EU. Even over all the other reasons I have given there is one much more important reason which I have stated over and over again.
There are 2.4 million in camps in Turkey. There are 24 million displaced within Syria itself. Over and above that less than one third of these children are from Syria.
So if we take this 3,000 we put 150,000 more at risk as their families, quite literally, sell them into the hands of the people traffickers. Of whom a percentage are also slavers, in the belief that these children will gain them access to a better life.
If I did not believe this, then over and above all my other issues with the dishonesty surrounding these children, both from their families and from the NGO's and the other governments, I would be inclined to take them.
But I could not make that decision knowing that it would put hundreds of thousands more children in danger.
Let's face it. If the French authorities were doing their job, those "Legal Minors" would be in care right this second. After all, no country in the EU takes into account the "wishes of the minor". Let's say 3,000 children in the UK upped sticks from abject poverty and then squatted in London demanding a better deal.
We'd let them, of course, wouldn't we?????
There is no difference here. To give in to blackmail is tantamount to murdering all those others who are only held back by the uncertainty that these 3,000 won't be let into the UK.
That is how I see it. I'm not heartless. Far from it. I can just see far enough to know that the laws of unintended consequences mean thousands of dead children if we do.
There are 10 types of people in the world:
Those who understand Binary and those who do not.