Nearly 1,000 people denied entry to France since attacks

Nearly 1,000 people denied entry to France since attacks

Good. I hope the number rises. There are people who belong in France (yeah, the "french"- how bout' that) and others who do not. But now of course posters will come out and accuse the French of being racist when in fact, they're just trying to protect their citizens.

As I said, each country owes to take care of it's own citizens first. Putting foreign nationals priorities over your own people is a great way to commit suicide for any nation.

Can't they enter any EU country then just drive into France?

Peter,

In the Schengen zone, yes.

I drove into Belgium the Monday after the attacks and hardly saw a police car. It's the European borders than need fencing off and patrolling with live rounds.

Can't they enter any EU country then just drive into France?

Walk in or ski in as they never control hikers. It's impossible with the length of border ( the Nazis failed to do it). Then, primo, that wouldn't change much to arrive by another country since the criteria to accept/refuse people are very similar in all EU+Swiss. Segundo, the current operetta (by director François Hollande) wants to show how French cops fight terrorism so they are now controlling a lot on the roads, which is very unusual...and a big waste of time. 1000 persons being refused is really nothing as that's not even the number of people that forgot a part of their ID/driving licence/car insurance docs on a given day... among the millions of persons crossing daily the Swiss/Belgian/Luxembourg/German/Italy/Spain borders (as they live and work/study in different countries).

I drove into Belgium the Monday after the attacks

Because that was the day they blocked the Luxembourg (creating a 4 hour delay to pass the border in car and in train)... Belgium was not yet 'suspect', they got their circus a few days later.

It's the European borders than need fencing off

What would that change for terrorism ? Most terrorists 'from outside' have/had all the documents needed to pass legally any control, and they would always find a way. And what difference for the local terros ? Of course, if the goal is different (like pushing back the boat people into the sea...without showing that's what you're doing), the fencing would do the trick...without solving anything.

they're just trying to protect their citizens.

These citizens are way way more threatened by paranoia, extreme-right, intolerance, dictature, cultural regression back to 1940... than by terrorism.

A nation, a country must do what it must to protect their citizens. Thay means "securing" what ever territory they can and denying immigration is only a small part of it. One must put idealism and humanitarian talks aside when lives and survival are the issues.

What would you do to protect yourself and your family?

Sadly this is not a matter of taking things, but of taking lives to prove religious preference and superiority. It is a threat and demand to change the way we live according to their needs and ways.

Would you submit with your idealism?

Because that was the day they blocked the Luxembourg (creating a 4 hour delay to pass the border in car and in train)... Belgium was not yet 'suspect', they got their circus a few days later.

Really? the French claimed they were closing the borders. The Belgian Clio was discovered immediately, parked as it was on a zebra crossing.

"What would that change for terrorism ?"

Perhaps a handful of terrorists are not my main interest in closing and militarising our borders.

I'm not sure the Nazi's are a good reference for most things. A coordinated effort by member states to close and enforce a no-entry into the continent is desperately needed.

You seem to be suggesting that because Hitler didn't manage to close the borders that we should just give up and let ourselves be over-run by migrants. The terrorists to clever to be caught.

No thanks.