Wonderfully evasive, kev. I’m not interested in knowing what you think is the “best solution”, which is hypothetical and subjective.

What I was referring to was whether – as implied in your post I was commenting on – you disagree with (and perhaps strongly oppose) our current international obligations (that according to you, make us serfs) to rescue people in our own search-and-rescue zone, and to respect people’s right to apply for asylum status in our own country.

What should it be, kev? Willingly respect our international (moral) obligations and respect the right to apply for asylum, or push-back/let them drown?

I had missed this post, Jozef. Your last sentence in particular intrigued me, given that the rest is too esoteric for my tastes.

You say: “Surely you still have your first year notes, the bit where laws cannot be against man.”

What intrigues me here is not the irony that someone like you should be lecturing a libertarian anti-statist like me about superfluous, tyrannical laws designed to control and oppress whole nations, but the fact that what you say has no connection whatsoever with your earlier blathering.

Correction: “…that’s NOT up your street.”

No, Liberal, it means that we have to comply with EU laws and international obligations, full stop. There are no ifs, because my ifs take a turning that’s up your street… Establishing causes is not something you do without the right facts, you see.

As I said, the best solution in the circumstances is to allow the asylum seekers to choose their ultimate destination. Frontex should be the agency to manage the registration, holdings and resettlement of migrants. Giving extra powers to the EU is not my cup of tea, but there you go.

“I’ve already expressed my opinion on this. It’s Catch22 all the way. We have no choice but to comply to EU and international obligations like the serfs we signed up ourselves to be”.

I take this to mean that if we weren’t “serfs” and hadn’t signed up for international obligations, kev the fascist would send all Africans back or let them drown.

Am I right, kev?

Ooh, Jozef must have hit a raw nerve. Is that steam coming out of kev’s ears?

Ah kev, then I think I must have missed the bit where you strongly condemned your dear Joseph’s push-back policy.

That explains it then. A fascist who can’t tell the difference between “was an anarchist” and “is an anarchist”.

Why do fascists have to be such idiots?

Agreed.

Now to do that, Muscat could have chosen to have his Al Jazeera interview sitting amongst these people, letting them talk and putting nationalistic hypocrisy to shame.

But that, I believe doesn’t tally with the alliance’s fabrications.

Barely an exchange and you’re at it.

Maybe that’s what bothers me most, a generosity of spirit unwilling to give up on a lost cause.

It’s not ego with me, kev, it’s the self-inflicted depressive mentality I see in others that prompts me to help.

Boat people don’t need it, they acted.

Surely you still have your first year notes, the bit where laws cannot be against man.