Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to Politics |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"This was going to be Labour's solution to immigration all along - simply legitimise illegal immigrants and Hey Presto the numbers plummet and the problem disappears. The move will simply encourage more channel crossings and exacerbate the problem. " Faster processing is what we've needed for years. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"This was going to be Labour's solution to immigration all along - simply legitimise illegal immigrants and Hey Presto the numbers plummet and the problem disappears. The move will simply encourage more channel crossings and exacerbate the problem. " There is no legitimisation of illegals immigrants. Back to school and learn about the difference between an illegal immigrant and an asylum seeker. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"This was going to be Labour's solution to immigration all along - simply legitimise illegal immigrants and Hey Presto the numbers plummet and the problem disappears. The move will simply encourage more channel crossings and exacerbate the problem. There is no legitimisation of illegals immigrants. Back to school and learn about the difference between an illegal immigrant and an asylum seeker." If someone throws away his papers and tells a story about how he is in danger wherever he came from, how exactly do you know if he is an illegal immigrant or a legit asylum seeker? If ISIS wants to send terrorists to the country, the boats are the easiest way to send them through because there is absolutely no way to do background checks for these people. This is basically an open border system and it's dangerous for the country in so many ways both economically and socially | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"This was going to be Labour's solution to immigration all along - simply legitimise illegal immigrants and Hey Presto the numbers plummet and the problem disappears. The move will simply encourage more channel crossings and exacerbate the problem. There is no legitimisation of illegals immigrants. Back to school and learn about the difference between an illegal immigrant and an asylum seeker." Yeah right. It's precisely that attitude the enables criminal people smuggling to succeed. Naïve. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"This cave in by Labour has added 5% to the already long standing social housing waiting list. 31,000 social housing completions in 2023. After right to buy and demolitions a net loss of 9000. (Shelter) When is the social housing to be built " it’s not possible to build enough when we let migrants pour in at this speed we all know that but starmer will do zero about it | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"This was going to be Labour's solution to immigration all along - simply legitimise illegal immigrants and Hey Presto the numbers plummet and the problem disappears. The move will simply encourage more channel crossings and exacerbate the problem. There is no legitimisation of illegals immigrants. Back to school and learn about the difference between an illegal immigrant and an asylum seeker. Yeah right. It's precisely that attitude the enables criminal people smuggling to succeed. Naïve. " Can we infer from this that ignorance about what is happening would somehow disable the criminal people smuggling? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"This cave in by Labour has added 5% to the already long standing social housing waiting list. 31,000 social housing completions in 2023. After right to buy and demolitions a net loss of 9000. (Shelter) When is the social housing to be built it’s not possible to build enough when we let migrants pour in at this speed we all know that but starmer will do zero about it " Why would he do anything about it when he can easily get more votes? These politicians never gave a fuck about the economy or safety/security of the people. If there is an option to get more votes, they will do it. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Great. A lot of them can now start to fill those job vacancies, start to pay tax and help fund their futures instead of taxpayers lining the pockets of newly formed hotel companies." It's sad that employment rate of asylum seekers who are granted asylum and hence the right to work is just 52% and even the ones who work do for lower hours compared to national average and earn much less than the national average. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Great. A lot of them can now start to fill those job vacancies, start to pay tax and help fund their futures instead of taxpayers lining the pockets of newly formed hotel companies. It's sad that employment rate of asylum seekers who are granted asylum and hence the right to work is just 52% and even the ones who work do for lower hours compared to national average and earn much less than the national average." It's even sadder that 0% were employed waiting years for their claim to be processed by the previous government. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"This was going to be Labour's solution to immigration all along - simply legitimise illegal immigrants and Hey Presto the numbers plummet and the problem disappears. The move will simply encourage more channel crossings and exacerbate the problem. There is no legitimisation of illegals immigrants. Back to school and learn about the difference between an illegal immigrant and an asylum seeker. Yeah right. It's precisely that attitude the enables criminal people smuggling to succeed. Naïve. Can we infer from this that ignorance about what is happening would somehow disable the criminal people smuggling? " It's actually ignorance that is fuelling people smuggling. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"This was going to be Labour's solution to immigration all along - simply legitimise illegal immigrants and Hey Presto the numbers plummet and the problem disappears. The move will simply encourage more channel crossings and exacerbate the problem. There is no legitimisation of illegals immigrants. Back to school and learn about the difference between an illegal immigrant and an asylum seeker. Yeah right. It's precisely that attitude the enables criminal people smuggling to succeed. Naïve. Can we infer from this that ignorance about what is happening would somehow disable the criminal people smuggling? It's actually ignorance that is fuelling people smuggling. " Yet when someone suggested that we should understand the situation better, by knowing the difference between asylum seekers and "illegal immigrants", your response was "Yeah right. It's precisely that attitude the enables criminal people smuggling to succeed." Just trying to understand what you're saying. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"This was going to be Labour's solution to immigration all along - simply legitimise illegal immigrants and Hey Presto the numbers plummet and the problem disappears. The move will simply encourage more channel crossings and exacerbate the problem. There is no legitimisation of illegals immigrants. Back to school and learn about the difference between an illegal immigrant and an asylum seeker. Yeah right. It's precisely that attitude the enables criminal people smuggling to succeed. Naïve. Can we infer from this that ignorance about what is happening would somehow disable the criminal people smuggling? It's actually ignorance that is fuelling people smuggling. Yet when someone suggested that we should understand the situation better, by knowing the difference between asylum seekers and "illegal immigrants", your response was "Yeah right. It's precisely that attitude the enables criminal people smuggling to succeed." Just trying to understand what you're saying. " What I'm saying is that the asylum system is being abused by criminal gangs, yet still we have apologists making excuses, and HR lawyers making themselves rich. The real tragedy in all this is that genuine asylum seekers have lost their voice, and with it their right to safe asylum. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Great. A lot of them can now start to fill those job vacancies, start to pay tax and help fund their futures instead of taxpayers lining the pockets of newly formed hotel companies. It's sad that employment rate of asylum seekers who are granted asylum and hence the right to work is just 52% and even the ones who work do for lower hours compared to national average and earn much less than the national average. It's even sadder that 0% were employed waiting years for their claim to be processed by the previous government." So the better option is to stop them from coming here in the first place right? They are clearly an economic burden whether you give asylum or not. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Great. A lot of them can now start to fill those job vacancies, start to pay tax and help fund their futures instead of taxpayers lining the pockets of newly formed hotel companies. It's sad that employment rate of asylum seekers who are granted asylum and hence the right to work is just 52% and even the ones who work do for lower hours compared to national average and earn much less than the national average. It's even sadder that 0% were employed waiting years for their claim to be processed by the previous government. So the better option is to stop them from coming here in the first place right? They are clearly an economic burden whether you give asylum or not." Great. How do you stop them coming here ? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Great. A lot of them can now start to fill those job vacancies, start to pay tax and help fund their futures instead of taxpayers lining the pockets of newly formed hotel companies. It's sad that employment rate of asylum seekers who are granted asylum and hence the right to work is just 52% and even the ones who work do for lower hours compared to national average and earn much less than the national average. It's even sadder that 0% were employed waiting years for their claim to be processed by the previous government. So the better option is to stop them from coming here in the first place right? They are clearly an economic burden whether you give asylum or not. Great. How do you stop them coming here ?" Make it a criminal offense to show up within the borders. Stop giving free accomodation and food. You know, stop having open borders. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"This was going to be Labour's solution to immigration all along - simply legitimise illegal immigrants and Hey Presto the numbers plummet and the problem disappears. The move will simply encourage more channel crossings and exacerbate the problem. There is no legitimisation of illegals immigrants. Back to school and learn about the difference between an illegal immigrant and an asylum seeker. Yeah right. It's precisely that attitude the enables criminal people smuggling to succeed. Naïve. Can we infer from this that ignorance about what is happening would somehow disable the criminal people smuggling? It's actually ignorance that is fuelling people smuggling. Yet when someone suggested that we should understand the situation better, by knowing the difference between asylum seekers and "illegal immigrants", your response was "Yeah right. It's precisely that attitude the enables criminal people smuggling to succeed." Just trying to understand what you're saying. What I'm saying is that the asylum system is being abused by criminal gangs, yet still we have apologists making excuses, " The person you replied to was attempting to clarify the differences. Not make excuses. " and HR lawyers making themselves rich. " Is that really happening as a driving factor, as the DM et al would have people believe? " The real tragedy in all this is that genuine asylum seekers have lost their voice, and with it their right to safe asylum." Well yes, let's try to focus on this then as a nation. Understanding the difference between asylum seekers, immigrants and people arriving through illegal means is a key element. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Great. A lot of them can now start to fill those job vacancies, start to pay tax and help fund their futures instead of taxpayers lining the pockets of newly formed hotel companies. It's sad that employment rate of asylum seekers who are granted asylum and hence the right to work is just 52% and even the ones who work do for lower hours compared to national average and earn much less than the national average. It's even sadder that 0% were employed waiting years for their claim to be processed by the previous government. So the better option is to stop them from coming here in the first place right? They are clearly an economic burden whether you give asylum or not. Great. How do you stop them coming here ?" People panicking about immigrants don't want to tackle any of the reasons that people are displaced: Climate change, war, poverty etc. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Great. A lot of them can now start to fill those job vacancies, start to pay tax and help fund their futures instead of taxpayers lining the pockets of newly formed hotel companies. It's sad that employment rate of asylum seekers who are granted asylum and hence the right to work is just 52% and even the ones who work do for lower hours compared to national average and earn much less than the national average. It's even sadder that 0% were employed waiting years for their claim to be processed by the previous government. So the better option is to stop them from coming here in the first place right? They are clearly an economic burden whether you give asylum or not. Great. How do you stop them coming here ? Make it a criminal offense to show up within the borders. Stop giving free accomodation and food. You know, stop having open borders." Ok you've broken international law and found them guilty. What do you do with them then. ? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Great. A lot of them can now start to fill those job vacancies, start to pay tax and help fund their futures instead of taxpayers lining the pockets of newly formed hotel companies. It's sad that employment rate of asylum seekers who are granted asylum and hence the right to work is just 52% and even the ones who work do for lower hours compared to national average and earn much less than the national average. It's even sadder that 0% were employed waiting years for their claim to be processed by the previous government. So the better option is to stop them from coming here in the first place right? They are clearly an economic burden whether you give asylum or not. Great. How do you stop them coming here ? Make it a criminal offense to show up within the borders. Stop giving free accomodation and food. You know, stop having open borders. Ok you've broken international law and found them guilty. What do you do with them then. ?" There is no such thing as "international law". What you have are agreements that countries have signed up to. In this case, it's the refugee conventions. Either work on changing them or get out of them. These refugee conventions are clearly having plenty of holes which many people are taking advantage of. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Great. A lot of them can now start to fill those job vacancies, start to pay tax and help fund their futures instead of taxpayers lining the pockets of newly formed hotel companies. It's sad that employment rate of asylum seekers who are granted asylum and hence the right to work is just 52% and even the ones who work do for lower hours compared to national average and earn much less than the national average. It's even sadder that 0% were employed waiting years for their claim to be processed by the previous government. So the better option is to stop them from coming here in the first place right? They are clearly an economic burden whether you give asylum or not. Great. How do you stop them coming here ? Make it a criminal offense to show up within the borders. Stop giving free accomodation and food. You know, stop having open borders. Ok you've broken international law and found them guilty. What do you do with them then. ? There is no such thing as "international law". What you have are agreements that countries have signed up to. In this case, it's the refugee conventions. Either work on changing them or get out of them. These refugee conventions are clearly having plenty of holes which many people are taking advantage of." And what do you do with them? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Great. A lot of them can now start to fill those job vacancies, start to pay tax and help fund their futures instead of taxpayers lining the pockets of newly formed hotel companies. It's sad that employment rate of asylum seekers who are granted asylum and hence the right to work is just 52% and even the ones who work do for lower hours compared to national average and earn much less than the national average. It's even sadder that 0% were employed waiting years for their claim to be processed by the previous government. So the better option is to stop them from coming here in the first place right? They are clearly an economic burden whether you give asylum or not. Great. How do you stop them coming here ? Make it a criminal offense to show up within the borders. Stop giving free accomodation and food. You know, stop having open borders. Ok you've broken international law and found them guilty. What do you do with them then. ? There is no such thing as "international law". What you have are agreements that countries have signed up to. In this case, it's the refugee conventions. Either work on changing them or get out of them. These refugee conventions are clearly having plenty of holes which many people are taking advantage of. And what do you do with them?" What you do with anyone else who breaks the country's law. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Great. A lot of them can now start to fill those job vacancies, start to pay tax and help fund their futures instead of taxpayers lining the pockets of newly formed hotel companies. It's sad that employment rate of asylum seekers who are granted asylum and hence the right to work is just 52% and even the ones who work do for lower hours compared to national average and earn much less than the national average. It's even sadder that 0% were employed waiting years for their claim to be processed by the previous government. So the better option is to stop them from coming here in the first place right? They are clearly an economic burden whether you give asylum or not. Great. How do you stop them coming here ? Make it a criminal offense to show up within the borders. Stop giving free accomodation and food. You know, stop having open borders. Ok you've broken international law and found them guilty. What do you do with them then. ? There is no such thing as "international law". What you have are agreements that countries have signed up to. In this case, it's the refugee conventions. Either work on changing them or get out of them. These refugee conventions are clearly having plenty of holes which many people are taking advantage of. And what do you do with them? What you do with anyone else who breaks the country's law. " Trials held in the imaginary courts and those convicted sent to imaginary prisons. It’s like something from Reforms Comedy Central contract | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"This was going to be Labour's solution to immigration all along - simply legitimise illegal immigrants and Hey Presto the numbers plummet and the problem disappears. The move will simply encourage more channel crossings and exacerbate the problem. There is no legitimisation of illegals immigrants. Back to school and learn about the difference between an illegal immigrant and an asylum seeker. Yeah right. It's precisely that attitude the enables criminal people smuggling to succeed. Naïve. Can we infer from this that ignorance about what is happening would somehow disable the criminal people smuggling? It's actually ignorance that is fuelling people smuggling. Yet when someone suggested that we should understand the situation better, by knowing the difference between asylum seekers and "illegal immigrants", your response was "Yeah right. It's precisely that attitude the enables criminal people smuggling to succeed." Just trying to understand what you're saying. " other side of that coin is we could close the borders turn the illegals around until we get a grip on the situation our responsibility is to the young ppl here and now the homeless the government need to remember that there elected to support the U.K. people first | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"This was going to be Labour's solution to immigration all along - simply legitimise illegal immigrants and Hey Presto the numbers plummet and the problem disappears. The move will simply encourage more channel crossings and exacerbate the problem. There is no legitimisation of illegals immigrants. Back to school and learn about the difference between an illegal immigrant and an asylum seeker. Yeah right. It's precisely that attitude the enables criminal people smuggling to succeed. Naïve. Can we infer from this that ignorance about what is happening would somehow disable the criminal people smuggling? It's actually ignorance that is fuelling people smuggling. Yet when someone suggested that we should understand the situation better, by knowing the difference between asylum seekers and "illegal immigrants", your response was "Yeah right. It's precisely that attitude the enables criminal people smuggling to succeed." Just trying to understand what you're saying. other side of that coin is we could close the borders turn the illegals around until we get a grip on the situation our responsibility is to the young ppl here and now the homeless the government need to remember that there elected to support the U.K. people first " How do we “close the borders”? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"This was going to be Labour's solution to immigration all along - simply legitimise illegal immigrants and Hey Presto the numbers plummet and the problem disappears. The move will simply encourage more channel crossings and exacerbate the problem. There is no legitimisation of illegals immigrants. Back to school and learn about the difference between an illegal immigrant and an asylum seeker. Yeah right. It's precisely that attitude the enables criminal people smuggling to succeed. Naïve. Can we infer from this that ignorance about what is happening would somehow disable the criminal people smuggling? It's actually ignorance that is fuelling people smuggling. Yet when someone suggested that we should understand the situation better, by knowing the difference between asylum seekers and "illegal immigrants", your response was "Yeah right. It's precisely that attitude the enables criminal people smuggling to succeed." Just trying to understand what you're saying. other side of that coin is we could close the borders turn the illegals around " How would this be done? " until we get a grip on the situation our responsibility is to the young ppl here and now the homeless the government need to remember that there elected to support the U.K. people first " Why would closing the boarders suddenly make the government give a fuck about British people, homeless people, young people? How are these things related? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"This was going to be Labour's solution to immigration all along - simply legitimise illegal immigrants and Hey Presto the numbers plummet and the problem disappears. The move will simply encourage more channel crossings and exacerbate the problem. There is no legitimisation of illegals immigrants. Back to school and learn about the difference between an illegal immigrant and an asylum seeker. Yeah right. It's precisely that attitude the enables criminal people smuggling to succeed. Naïve. Can we infer from this that ignorance about what is happening would somehow disable the criminal people smuggling? It's actually ignorance that is fuelling people smuggling. Yet when someone suggested that we should understand the situation better, by knowing the difference between asylum seekers and "illegal immigrants", your response was "Yeah right. It's precisely that attitude the enables criminal people smuggling to succeed." Just trying to understand what you're saying. other side of that coin is we could close the borders turn the illegals around until we get a grip on the situation our responsibility is to the young ppl here and now the homeless the government need to remember that there elected to support the U.K. people first How do we “close the borders”?" By policing them maybe? If we can't have borders that are secure, what's the point of having them in the first place? We could just sack Border Force and invest the saved cash in hostels. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Great. A lot of them can now start to fill those job vacancies, start to pay tax and help fund their futures instead of taxpayers lining the pockets of newly formed hotel companies. It's sad that employment rate of asylum seekers who are granted asylum and hence the right to work is just 52% and even the ones who work do for lower hours compared to national average and earn much less than the national average. It's even sadder that 0% were employed waiting years for their claim to be processed by the previous government. So the better option is to stop them from coming here in the first place right? They are clearly an economic burden whether you give asylum or not. Great. How do you stop them coming here ? Make it a criminal offense to show up within the borders. Stop giving free accomodation and food. You know, stop having open borders. Ok you've broken international law and found them guilty. What do you do with them then. ? There is no such thing as "international law". What you have are agreements that countries have signed up to. In this case, it's the refugee conventions. Either work on changing them or get out of them. These refugee conventions are clearly having plenty of holes which many people are taking advantage of. And what do you do with them? What you do with anyone else who breaks the country's law. Trials held in the imaginary courts and those convicted sent to imaginary prisons. It’s like something from Reforms Comedy Central contract " Most countries who have borders already do this. So I don't know which part of it is imaginary. The moment you charge them and stop giving away free accommodation and money, people will just stop coming because they know there is nothing they get out of it. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"This was going to be Labour's solution to immigration all along - simply legitimise illegal immigrants and Hey Presto the numbers plummet and the problem disappears. The move will simply encourage more channel crossings and exacerbate the problem. There is no legitimisation of illegals immigrants. Back to school and learn about the difference between an illegal immigrant and an asylum seeker. Yeah right. It's precisely that attitude the enables criminal people smuggling to succeed. Naïve. Can we infer from this that ignorance about what is happening would somehow disable the criminal people smuggling? It's actually ignorance that is fuelling people smuggling. Yet when someone suggested that we should understand the situation better, by knowing the difference between asylum seekers and "illegal immigrants", your response was "Yeah right. It's precisely that attitude the enables criminal people smuggling to succeed." Just trying to understand what you're saying. other side of that coin is we could close the borders turn the illegals around until we get a grip on the situation our responsibility is to the young ppl here and now the homeless the government need to remember that there elected to support the U.K. people first How do we “close the borders”?" we live on an island it’s not hard lol | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"This was going to be Labour's solution to immigration all along - simply legitimise illegal immigrants and Hey Presto the numbers plummet and the problem disappears. The move will simply encourage more channel crossings and exacerbate the problem. There is no legitimisation of illegals immigrants. Back to school and learn about the difference between an illegal immigrant and an asylum seeker. Yeah right. It's precisely that attitude the enables criminal people smuggling to succeed. Naïve. Can we infer from this that ignorance about what is happening would somehow disable the criminal people smuggling? It's actually ignorance that is fuelling people smuggling. Yet when someone suggested that we should understand the situation better, by knowing the difference between asylum seekers and "illegal immigrants", your response was "Yeah right. It's precisely that attitude the enables criminal people smuggling to succeed." Just trying to understand what you're saying. other side of that coin is we could close the borders turn the illegals around until we get a grip on the situation our responsibility is to the young ppl here and now the homeless the government need to remember that there elected to support the U.K. people first How do we “close the borders”?we live on an island it’s not hard lol" Okay, so we close all the points of entry, close the airports, close the ferry terminals. All international trade stops. Then what? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Great. A lot of them can now start to fill those job vacancies, start to pay tax and help fund their futures instead of taxpayers lining the pockets of newly formed hotel companies. It's sad that employment rate of asylum seekers who are granted asylum and hence the right to work is just 52% and even the ones who work do for lower hours compared to national average and earn much less than the national average. It's even sadder that 0% were employed waiting years for their claim to be processed by the previous government. So the better option is to stop them from coming here in the first place right? They are clearly an economic burden whether you give asylum or not. Great. How do you stop them coming here ? Make it a criminal offense to show up within the borders. Stop giving free accomodation and food. You know, stop having open borders. Ok you've broken international law and found them guilty. What do you do with them then. ? There is no such thing as "international law". What you have are agreements that countries have signed up to. In this case, it's the refugee conventions. Either work on changing them or get out of them. These refugee conventions are clearly having plenty of holes which many people are taking advantage of. And what do you do with them? What you do with anyone else who breaks the country's law. Trials held in the imaginary courts and those convicted sent to imaginary prisons. It’s like something from Reforms Comedy Central contract Most countries who have borders already do this. So I don't know which part of it is imaginary. The moment you charge them and stop giving away free accommodation and money, people will just stop coming because they know there is nothing they get out of it." I said imaginary courts and imaginary prisons. If you look past everything is about boats you’d see that there is a massive backlog in the courts. You’d also see that both the last government and the current government are having to release prisoners early due to the closure of both courts and prisons. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I said imaginary courts and imaginary prisons. If you look past everything is about boats you’d see that there is a massive backlog in the courts. You’d also see that both the last government and the current government are having to release prisoners early due to the closure of both courts and prisons." There being massive backlog in courts doesn't matter? End of the day we make it clear that what they are doing is illegal. They will not be provided accommodation. And it will be made clear that they will never be getting residence permit either. So why would they still come? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"This is a common problem across Europe. Germany has shut land borders, Poland has suspended asylum claims and Italy are processing in Albania. Some were very sceptical when the right wing party won in Italy but they are about to implement a plan that even Ursula of the EU is impressed by and also wants deportation speeded up. Why aren't these countries welcoming the migrants given they are apparently good for the country's they go to. " People were told that "refugees" are good for the economy. That has been proven to be a lie as most of them are not working and they are a net loss to the economy. People were told that diversity is good. Given the number of people who get murdered for drawing a picture, receive death threats over a book and the social issues ever since the Israel-Palestine issue started, that was proven to be a lie too. So people are democratically making their choice clear on this matter. The problem is with politicians who still treat the refugee conventions like it's a religious text even though it's not fit for purpose and is being exploited in large scale. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"This was going to be Labour's solution to immigration all along - simply legitimise illegal immigrants and Hey Presto the numbers plummet and the problem disappears. The move will simply encourage more channel crossings and exacerbate the problem. There is no legitimisation of illegals immigrants. Back to school and learn about the difference between an illegal immigrant and an asylum seeker. Yeah right. It's precisely that attitude the enables criminal people smuggling to succeed. Naïve. Can we infer from this that ignorance about what is happening would somehow disable the criminal people smuggling? It's actually ignorance that is fuelling people smuggling. Yet when someone suggested that we should understand the situation better, by knowing the difference between asylum seekers and "illegal immigrants", your response was "Yeah right. It's precisely that attitude the enables criminal people smuggling to succeed." Just trying to understand what you're saying. other side of that coin is we could close the borders turn the illegals around until we get a grip on the situation our responsibility is to the young ppl here and now the homeless the government need to remember that there elected to support the U.K. people first How do we “close the borders”?we live on an island it’s not hard lol" Well it seems like it is otherwise nobody would get ashore LOL | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"This was going to be Labour's solution to immigration all along - simply legitimise illegal immigrants and Hey Presto the numbers plummet and the problem disappears. The move will simply encourage more channel crossings and exacerbate the problem. There is no legitimisation of illegals immigrants. Back to school and learn about the difference between an illegal immigrant and an asylum seeker. Yeah right. It's precisely that attitude the enables criminal people smuggling to succeed. Naïve. Can we infer from this that ignorance about what is happening would somehow disable the criminal people smuggling? It's actually ignorance that is fuelling people smuggling. Yet when someone suggested that we should understand the situation better, by knowing the difference between asylum seekers and "illegal immigrants", your response was "Yeah right. It's precisely that attitude the enables criminal people smuggling to succeed." Just trying to understand what you're saying. other side of that coin is we could close the borders turn the illegals around until we get a grip on the situation our responsibility is to the young ppl here and now the homeless the government need to remember that there elected to support the U.K. people first How do we “close the borders”? By policing them maybe? If we can't have borders that are secure, what's the point of having them in the first place? We could just sack Border Force and invest the saved cash in hostels." Right so we need a far larger Border Force. Armed perhaps? Maybe build a huge wall along the channel coast. Mines in the channel? Pill boxes? Searchlights? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"This is a common problem across Europe. Germany has shut land borders, Poland has suspended asylum claims and Italy are processing in Albania. Some were very sceptical when the right wing party won in Italy but they are about to implement a plan that even Ursula of the EU is impressed by and also wants deportation speeded up. Why aren't these countries welcoming the migrants given they are apparently good for the country's they go to. " "Germany has shut land borders". This is not true. You can still enter Germany overland. Where did you get this false information from? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"This was going to be Labour's solution to immigration all along - simply legitimise illegal immigrants and Hey Presto the numbers plummet and the problem disappears. The move will simply encourage more channel crossings and exacerbate the problem. There is no legitimisation of illegals immigrants. Back to school and learn about the difference between an illegal immigrant and an asylum seeker. Yeah right. It's precisely that attitude the enables criminal people smuggling to succeed. Naïve. Can we infer from this that ignorance about what is happening would somehow disable the criminal people smuggling? It's actually ignorance that is fuelling people smuggling. Yet when someone suggested that we should understand the situation better, by knowing the difference between asylum seekers and "illegal immigrants", your response was "Yeah right. It's precisely that attitude the enables criminal people smuggling to succeed." Just trying to understand what you're saying. other side of that coin is we could close the borders turn the illegals around until we get a grip on the situation our responsibility is to the young ppl here and now the homeless the government need to remember that there elected to support the U.K. people first How do we “close the borders”? By policing them maybe? If we can't have borders that are secure, what's the point of having them in the first place? We could just sack Border Force and invest the saved cash in hostels. Right so we need a far larger Border Force. Armed perhaps? Maybe build a huge wall along the channel coast. Mines in the channel? Pill boxes? Searchlights?" Just whatever it takes - as with all policing. It starts with the will to control our national borders and stop criminality. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"This was going to be Labour's solution to immigration all along - simply legitimise illegal immigrants and Hey Presto the numbers plummet and the problem disappears. The move will simply encourage more channel crossings and exacerbate the problem. There is no legitimisation of illegals immigrants. Back to school and learn about the difference between an illegal immigrant and an asylum seeker. Yeah right. It's precisely that attitude the enables criminal people smuggling to succeed. Naïve. Can we infer from this that ignorance about what is happening would somehow disable the criminal people smuggling? It's actually ignorance that is fuelling people smuggling. Yet when someone suggested that we should understand the situation better, by knowing the difference between asylum seekers and "illegal immigrants", your response was "Yeah right. It's precisely that attitude the enables criminal people smuggling to succeed." Just trying to understand what you're saying. other side of that coin is we could close the borders turn the illegals around until we get a grip on the situation our responsibility is to the young ppl here and now the homeless the government need to remember that there elected to support the U.K. people first How do we “close the borders”? By policing them maybe? If we can't have borders that are secure, what's the point of having them in the first place? We could just sack Border Force and invest the saved cash in hostels. Right so we need a far larger Border Force. Armed perhaps? Maybe build a huge wall along the channel coast. Mines in the channel? Pill boxes? Searchlights?" You do know policing is not all the things you’ve said, it can be simply arresting, detaining and deporting. Why is there so much emotional language being thrown into this? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Well the Asylum Seekers did say they were waiting for the Labour Government to be voted in before more of them came over knowing Labour were softer on immigration so let's not be shocked of the numbers coming over" This utter nonsense can be traced back to a 'vote Tory' article in the Telegraph. Does anyone really think someone who has to leave their home for war, because their life is in danger, or all the other reasons that someone would apply for asylum, is waiting for the results of an election that will have zero impact on asylum application rules? Please step this way to my bridge shop. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Well the Asylum Seekers did say they were waiting for the Labour Government to be voted in before more of them came over knowing Labour were softer on immigration so let's not be shocked of the numbers coming over This utter nonsense can be traced back to a 'vote Tory' article in the Telegraph. Does anyone really think someone who has to leave their home for war, because their life is in danger, or all the other reasons that someone would apply for asylum, is waiting for the results of an election that will have zero impact on asylum application rules? Please step this way to my bridge shop." People running from war, no. People coming because they get free money? Absolutely yes. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"63,000 future Labour voters…. Bit like what the Dems have been doing in the US."  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Well the Asylum Seekers did say they were waiting for the Labour Government to be voted in before more of them came over knowing Labour were softer on immigration so let's not be shocked of the numbers coming over This utter nonsense can be traced back to a 'vote Tory' article in the Telegraph. Does anyone really think someone who has to leave their home for war, because their life is in danger, or all the other reasons that someone would apply for asylum, is waiting for the results of an election that will have zero impact on asylum application rules? Please step this way to my bridge shop." Its not nonsense its facts | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Well the Asylum Seekers did say they were waiting for the Labour Government to be voted in before more of them came over knowing Labour were softer on immigration so let's not be shocked of the numbers coming over This utter nonsense can be traced back to a 'vote Tory' article in the Telegraph. Does anyone really think someone who has to leave their home for war, because their life is in danger, or all the other reasons that someone would apply for asylum, is waiting for the results of an election that will have zero impact on asylum application rules? Please step this way to my bridge shop. Its not nonsense its facts" Sweet, do you want to transfer me £2 million for Brooklyn Bridge? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Well the Asylum Seekers did say they were waiting for the Labour Government to be voted in before more of them came over knowing Labour were softer on immigration so let's not be shocked of the numbers coming over This utter nonsense can be traced back to a 'vote Tory' article in the Telegraph. Does anyone really think someone who has to leave their home for war, because their life is in danger, or all the other reasons that someone would apply for asylum, is waiting for the results of an election that will have zero impact on asylum application rules? Please step this way to my bridge shop. Its not nonsense its facts Sweet, do you want to transfer me £2 million for Brooklyn Bridge?" ask Keir Starmer for that | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Well the Asylum Seekers did say they were waiting for the Labour Government to be voted in before more of them came over knowing Labour were softer on immigration so let's not be shocked of the numbers coming over This utter nonsense can be traced back to a 'vote Tory' article in the Telegraph. Does anyone really think someone who has to leave their home for war, because their life is in danger, or all the other reasons that someone would apply for asylum, is waiting for the results of an election that will have zero impact on asylum application rules? Please step this way to my bridge shop. Its not nonsense its facts Sweet, do you want to transfer me £2 million for Brooklyn Bridge? ask Keir Starmer for that" Why? He's not the one claiming that a load of absolute bollocks, which is clearly made up, & makes absolutely no sense, is "facts". | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"n 2019 we had 72K immigrants from India. In 20232 it was 268k. This dropped to 250k last year. In 2019 we had 14k immigrants from Nigeria. In 2022 it was 121k. Last year it was 141K. Yearly arrival by boat are a drop in the ocean if you'll excuse the pun. " Legal immigrants are vetted for everything from diseases to criminal background and economic viability. Illegal immigrants aren't. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"n 2019 we had 72K immigrants from India. In 20232 it was 268k. This dropped to 250k last year. In 2019 we had 14k immigrants from Nigeria. In 2022 it was 121k. Last year it was 141K. Yearly arrival by boat are a drop in the ocean if you'll excuse the pun. Legal immigrants are vetted for everything from diseases to criminal background and economic viability. Illegal immigrants aren't." Ah so it's not the numbers you are worried about gotcha. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"n 2019 we had 72K immigrants from India. In 20232 it was 268k. This dropped to 250k last year. In 2019 we had 14k immigrants from Nigeria. In 2022 it was 121k. Last year it was 141K. Yearly arrival by boat are a drop in the ocean if you'll excuse the pun. Legal immigrants are vetted for everything from diseases to criminal background and economic viability. Illegal immigrants aren't. Ah so it's not the numbers you are worried about gotcha." That's what you got from that? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Great. A lot of them can now start to fill those job vacancies, start to pay tax and help fund their futures instead of taxpayers lining the pockets of newly formed hotel companies. It's sad that employment rate of asylum seekers who are granted asylum and hence the right to work is just 52% and even the ones who work do for lower hours compared to national average and earn much less than the national average. It's even sadder that 0% were employed waiting years for their claim to be processed by the previous government. So the better option is to stop them from coming here in the first place right? They are clearly an economic burden whether you give asylum or not. Great. How do you stop them coming here ? Make it a criminal offense to show up within the borders. Stop giving free accomodation and food. You know, stop having open borders." If they come here illegally, then they should be protected for it. With a mandatory prison sentence, but also with the choice of being deported if that represents a more favorable option to them. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Just a bit of reflection for those who imply that it is only working (often said military) age men doing these crossings. The Guardian today… “A baby died after a boat carrying people in the Channel towards Britain capsized off the French coast, local coastguards have said. Sixty-five people were rescued after the overloaded boat started to sink off the coast of Wissant, in northern France, on Thursday night. Some people were in the water when rescuers arrived. A baby found in the water was later declared dead. The local prefecture said: “Rescuers found that the boat, which was heavily loaded, was in difficulty and that some people were in the water. Rescuers began to recover the people in difficulty. At the same time further searches were carried out to find people who could be stranded at sea.” On 5 October, a two-year-old child was crushed to death and three others also died during an attempt to cross the Channel. [snip] The charity Women for Refugee Women said: “These tragic deaths are preventable. We need safe routes now. Our thoughts are with the baby’s loved ones and all who were on the boat.” " I see the loss and tragedy it makes me really sad and angry that a parent would put their child in such a dangerous position. Charities calling for safe routes to prevent this from happening, seem to be concerned only on a single solution. The message of not crossing and putting your child in danger should be the first and most effective thing to do? People are not fleeing from danger when they embark on the crossing and they must know others have died, they should be getting that message out there as a priority. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Just a bit of reflection for those who imply that it is only working (often said military) age men doing these crossings. The Guardian today… “A baby died after a boat carrying people in the Channel towards Britain capsized off the French coast, local coastguards have said. Sixty-five people were rescued after the overloaded boat started to sink off the coast of Wissant, in northern France, on Thursday night. Some people were in the water when rescuers arrived. A baby found in the water was later declared dead. The local prefecture said: “Rescuers found that the boat, which was heavily loaded, was in difficulty and that some people were in the water. Rescuers began to recover the people in difficulty. At the same time further searches were carried out to find people who could be stranded at sea.” On 5 October, a two-year-old child was crushed to death and three others also died during an attempt to cross the Channel. [snip] The charity Women for Refugee Women said: “These tragic deaths are preventable. We need safe routes now. Our thoughts are with the baby’s loved ones and all who were on the boat.” I see the loss and tragedy it makes me really sad and angry that a parent would put their child in such a dangerous position. Charities calling for safe routes to prevent this from happening, seem to be concerned only on a single solution. The message of not crossing and putting your child in danger should be the first and most effective thing to do? People are not fleeing from danger when they embark on the crossing and they must know others have died, they should be getting that message out there as a priority. " We do need safe routes. We have discussed that at length on here. It is a no brainer. I have no way of putting myself in the shoes of these people but I cannot understand why you would put your child at such risk. I get it when escaping out of places like Syria. You’d do anything to escape immediate danger but thereafter you’d have to balance risk surely? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"This is a common problem across Europe. Germany has shut land borders, Poland has suspended asylum claims and Italy are processing in Albania. Some were very sceptical when the right wing party won in Italy but they are about to implement a plan that even Ursula of the EU is impressed by and also wants deportation speeded up. Why aren't these countries welcoming the migrants given they are apparently good for the country's they go to. "Germany has shut land borders". This is not true. You can still enter Germany overland. Where did you get this false information from?" Poor choice of words on my part regarding Germany, who have reintroduced border checks in an area that was supposed to be borderless. The rest of my post still seems accurate. Got it from the BBC mostly and seen in lots of other places | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"This is a common problem across Europe. Germany has shut land borders, Poland has suspended asylum claims and Italy are processing in Albania. Some were very sceptical when the right wing party won in Italy but they are about to implement a plan that even Ursula of the EU is impressed by and also wants deportation speeded up. Why aren't these countries welcoming the migrants given they are apparently good for the country's they go to. "Germany has shut land borders". This is not true. You can still enter Germany overland. Where did you get this false information from? Poor choice of words on my part regarding Germany, who have reintroduced border checks in an area that was supposed to be borderless. The rest of my post still seems accurate. Got it from the BBC mostly and seen in lots of other places" Okay, so we're no closer to knowing what people here mean when they say "close our boarders". Because we already have boarder checks. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Okay, so we're no closer to knowing what people here mean when they say "close our boarders". Because we already have boarder checks." Johnny the other day you were playing the lost consonant and today the added vowel  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"This is a common problem across Europe. Germany has shut land borders, Poland has suspended asylum claims and Italy are processing in Albania. Some were very sceptical when the right wing party won in Italy but they are about to implement a plan that even Ursula of the EU is impressed by and also wants deportation speeded up. Why aren't these countries welcoming the migrants given they are apparently good for the country's they go to. "Germany has shut land borders". This is not true. You can still enter Germany overland. Where did you get this false information from? Poor choice of words on my part regarding Germany, who have reintroduced border checks in an area that was supposed to be borderless. The rest of my post still seems accurate. Got it from the BBC mostly and seen in lots of other places Okay, so we're no closer to knowing what people here mean when they say "close our boarders". Because we already have boarder checks." How many times do you have to be asked? What is the point in border checks if people can just enter where there are no checks and aren't prosecuted? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"This is a common problem across Europe. Germany has shut land borders, Poland has suspended asylum claims and Italy are processing in Albania. Some were very sceptical when the right wing party won in Italy but they are about to implement a plan that even Ursula of the EU is impressed by and also wants deportation speeded up. Why aren't these countries welcoming the migrants given they are apparently good for the country's they go to. "Germany has shut land borders". This is not true. You can still enter Germany overland. Where did you get this false information from? Poor choice of words on my part regarding Germany, who have reintroduced border checks in an area that was supposed to be borderless. The rest of my post still seems accurate. Got it from the BBC mostly and seen in lots of other places Okay, so we're no closer to knowing what people here mean when they say "close our boarders". Because we already have boarder checks. How many times do you have to be asked? What is the point in border checks if people can just enter where there are no checks and aren't prosecuted? " But there is a check. You need to say the magic words "I am seeking asylum". That's a tough password to crack. Toughest border control in the world. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Okay, so we're no closer to knowing what people here mean when they say "close our boarders". Because we already have boarder checks. Johnny the other day you were playing the lost consonant and today the added vowel "
I blame my glasses. I need a new prescription. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I have no way of putting myself in the shoes of these people but I cannot understand why you would put your child at such risk. I get it when escaping out of places like Syria. You’d do anything to escape immediate danger but thereafter you’d have to balance risk surely?" Coming from - No job, no home, no prospects, poverty, no car, no nhs, no hot shower, no washing machine, no gas central heating, no credit facilities etc etc I totally get it, they are leaving nothing and everything to gain | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"This is a common problem across Europe. Germany has shut land borders, Poland has suspended asylum claims and Italy are processing in Albania. Some were very sceptical when the right wing party won in Italy but they are about to implement a plan that even Ursula of the EU is impressed by and also wants deportation speeded up. Why aren't these countries welcoming the migrants given they are apparently good for the country's they go to. "Germany has shut land borders". This is not true. You can still enter Germany overland. Where did you get this false information from? Poor choice of words on my part regarding Germany, who have reintroduced border checks in an area that was supposed to be borderless. The rest of my post still seems accurate. Got it from the BBC mostly and seen in lots of other places Okay, so we're no closer to knowing what people here mean when they say "close our boarders". Because we already have boarder checks." Well as my post was nothing to do with our borders, then I guess no. My post was just showing how this problem and the actions taken by other countries are quite similar. Germany have reintroduced border checks, Poland suspending asylum claims and right wing Italy getting high praise from the EU head for their plans to process in Albania | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Great. A lot of them can now start to fill those job vacancies, start to pay tax and help fund their futures instead of taxpayers lining the pockets of newly formed hotel companies. It's sad that employment rate of asylum seekers who are granted asylum and hence the right to work is just 52% and even the ones who work do for lower hours compared to national average and earn much less than the national average." Doesn’t have to be that way. I was talking to an HR director in a tech firm in Dublin during the week, and her firm have hired several people from the refugee hotels, people who now have the financial means to move out, pay tax and support themselves | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Great. A lot of them can now start to fill those job vacancies, start to pay tax and help fund their futures instead of taxpayers lining the pockets of newly formed hotel companies. It's sad that employment rate of asylum seekers who are granted asylum and hence the right to work is just 52% and even the ones who work do for lower hours compared to national average and earn much less than the national average. Doesn’t have to be that way. I was talking to an HR director in a tech firm in Dublin during the week, and her firm have hired several people from the refugee hotels, people who now have the financial means to move out, pay tax and support themselves " It's very easy to find anecdotal stories like this. But that doesn't prove a trend. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"63,000 future Labour voters…. Bit like what the Dems have been doing in the US."  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
