RayC

1 hour ago, BarraMarra said:

What a load of crap Rayc. I posted videos stating most if not all of the illegals coming over are yioung fighting age. As for persecution give us Evidence of just how many are legal and able to settle into society on Arrival. Don't come back with a deflection or whataboutism I'll give you something to think about while your searching. How many are old or how many females and kids are scrambling for the boat.

 

 

 

 

 

For the umpteenth time, complete and utter nonsense. It certainly is a load of crap, Barra.

You restate that most of the illegal immigrants are young men of fighting age. And? You consider that to be sufficient proof that they are about to cause havoc on the streets of the UK?

Numbers of refugees? In the year to September 2024, 62,089 people were granted refugee status in the UK.

As for deflection or whataboutism, more absolute nonsense. I've addressed your questions head on. The fact is you don't like my responses.

56 minutes ago, nauseus said:

 

Oh goody! That's OK then.

What's your point?

3 minutes ago, BarraMarra said:

Where have I said all immigrants are sex pests ?? Native Population ? yes we are worried Roy. These boats are crammed with over 50 in a boat, there all young fighting age there maybe 1-2 females in the boat and there only there as a for protection so the boat is not slashed.

Well you certainly haven't posted anything that could be considered remotely positive about immigrants.

You say that they are all young men of fighting age. What message are you trying to convey by that?

I don't doubt that many (most?) of these illegal immigrants are economic migrants and they should be dealt with accordingly. However, some are fleeing persecution and should be treated as refugees. If you were a homosexual or a political dissident in Afghanistan, Iran, Syria, etc wouldn't you flee to save your life?

19 minutes ago, BarraMarra said:

No we are not saying that Roy we are saying some or we do not know how many are coming into the UK, Please stop putting words into our Mouths.

Good so you admit that not all immigrants are wrong 'uns.

Not sure how I could have reached that conclusion given that every one of your posts either paints immigrants in a negative light or suggests that the native population are being victimised.

4 minutes ago, BarraMarra said:

Im sure you wouldnt like this Scum bag living next door to you RayC would you.

You're right, I wouldn't; who in their right mind would? But then not every immigrant - legal or illegal - is a sex offender.

30 minutes ago, nauseus said:

 

The problem that you refer to is the Southport (terror) incident I think.

 

The protests and aggravated problems nationwide concerning the settlement of immigrants are different. They have not been simultaneous but they are serious enough to warrant national coverage. Families spread throughout the country get this news directly from kin, and they worry about it. It is a national concern now. 

Deleted. Duplicate post.

8 minutes ago, nauseus said:

 

The problem that you refer to is the Southport (terror) incident I think.

 

The protests and aggravated problems nationwide concerning the settlement of immigrants are different. They have not been simultaneous but they are serious enough to warrant national coverage. Families spread throughout the country get this news directly from kin, and they worry about it. It is a national concern now. 

You're right; these protests are uncoordinated and not simultaneous and, therefore, individually they are not worthy of nationwide coverage. 

I don't doubt that illegal migration is a national concern. What I reject is the idea that the national media is not giving it sufficient coverage. The link to the BBC documentary about the subject proves that.

2 minutes ago, nauseus said:

 

And it's happening all over the country, as in nationally.

When the protests happened nationwide this time last year, they were headline news across the media, including the BBC 6 o'clock and 10 o'clock news bulletins. An isolated local protest in Epping - which is what the OP posted - is just that: a local protest.

19 minutes ago, BusyB said:

 

Of course not: 'Labour' won a 146 seat majority on barely 34% of the national vote.

 

 

Yes, completely undemocratic. Just as it was in 2019 when the Conservatives had an 80-seat majority after winning only 43% of the vote.

6 minutes ago, nauseus said:

 

They are definitely newsworthy to the many people living close to these migrant bases.

I'm sure they are. It's called local news.

12 minutes ago, nauseus said:

 

Few and far between but might not know that. 

That is probably because most of these protests are local and not considered sufficiently newsworthy to be broadcast nationally but you probably know that.

51 minutes ago, BarraMarra said:

This what happens when you allow a hotel in your town to be used for migrants. This was witheld from most news reports I wonder why?

 

43 minutes ago, BarraMarra said:

And again a Muslim gang surrounding a police Vehicle because 1 of the Muslims in the area was arrested in Bradford.

 

And you think that this sort of thing is sufficiently important and newsworthy to be covered in the main news bulletins? 

Introducing any type of PR system is welcome although, unfortunately, I doubt that it will be extended to General Elections.

16 minutes ago, BarraMarra said:

Depends what the Region is being reported on by the BEEB most big protests such as in london are not transmitted or Aired on Terestial TV.

13 minutes ago, BarraMarra said:

You wont see this on main british TV.

 

 

Once again, complete and utter nonsense 

6 minutes ago, BarraMarra said:

Allowing mass migration with open boarders.

Legal immigration to the UK has increased since Brexit.

6 minutes ago, BarraMarra said:

 

And preventing Foreign criminals to be immediatly deported  from the UK  due to the HMRC ruling from the Hague.

EU law allows member states to refuse entry to individuals who pose a threat to public order, security, or public health.

Not sure if you mean the International Court of Justice (ICJ) which is based in the Hague or the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) in Strasbourg? In any event, it's irrelevant as both are completely separate entities to the EU 

26 minutes ago, BarraMarra said:

Unfortunatly Tiger we have to look on websites to witness protests as all our media is banned from filming anyone showing British Patriotism.

Complete and utter nonsense 

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c87pqnn803yo.amp

11 hours ago, DonniePeverley said:

 

 

Still waiting to learn what laws from Brussels really impeded your life .

 

 

It's a very pertinent question to ask.

Many laws concerning food safety, animal welfare, consumer protection, environmental waste, etc. originated from Brussels do affect an individual's life in the UK. However, guess what, the overwhelming majority of those laws remain on the UK Statute book. And why's that? Because they are good laws which benefit the public. 

Brexiters will argue that you don't need to be in the EU to develop such laws. True, but the UK would need an even bigger army of civil servants - to research and draft legislation - and more parliamentary time to enact these laws individually. Delegating the European Commission to develop these laws results in economies of scale for the 27 member states.

It has been well documented that for those Brits involved in trade with EU companies, Brexit has had a profoundly negative effect on their daily lives.

On the positive side, now that we have left the EU we are free to rescind Commission Regulation (EC) No. 2257/94, which deals with 'Bendy Bananas'. I wonder why that hasn't happened yet? Could it be that there are other sections of this Regulation which might be beneficial to the British consumer?

3 hours ago, Magictoad said:

Some people say we need all the immigrants for future employment.  They are the employees of the future while we the indigenous people leave, get out or convert to Islam as they have in many countries before us. By 2060 the indigenous British people will be a minority in Britain.  There are a few European countries that have a nice climate and are not moslem.

I would hazard a guess that the  "indigenous British people" i.e. pure blooded Celts have been a minority in GB for +/-1500 years as a minimum.

1 hour ago, nauseus said:

 

Better to do it my way and just stop the taxis - force the French to turn and head back home with their traffic in tow - they've been taking the p1ss for far too long.

 

Best Wishes

Old Blue Eyes

Very flirty 😘

Intercepting the French navy in international waters might be less provocative than landing the marines on French beaches and/or blockading French ports, but it will still create an incident and a response which could quickly escalate.

2 hours ago, ericbj said:

 

So give us your solution.

Imo 'Smash the Gangs' is the solution, but how you do that is another matter, although I'm convinced that it will need coordinated international action rather than countries acting individually.

15 minutes ago, nauseus said:

 

Just keep voting until we get it right, right? Like Lisbon. Pah!

Oh dear.

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. You must have forgotten that I stated in my previous post that the call for a "People's" vote lacked validity.

4 minutes ago, nauseus said:

 

I can't believe that you asked that first question. The act of signing up without a referendum skewed the whole thing. Politicians know that people get tired of too many changes - they rely on voter laziness and often get their way.

Why should it be skewed? Individuals should ask themselves the same basic question - 'Do I think that membership of the EU is beneficial for the UK? - and vote accordingly. If anything, asking for confirmation after joining should lead to a more informed vote as there is the experience of membership to take into account. 

4 minutes ago, nauseus said:

I am saying that to be able to decide fairly, then voters would have needed to read at least a good honest key point summary of the Treaty of Rome, then balancing that with what Heath & Co (and Powell) had to say - I know that Powell was not popular but he was neither devious nor a liar. In 1972 inside Parliament there was clearly a large split on the issue, which resulted in three readings and a very narrow win for Teddy - at the same time, a referendum might well have gone the other way.

Access to information was obviously not as widely available in the '70s as it is now, however, I imagine that the broadsheets contained a good deal of facts and informed opinion about the pros and cons of joining the EC.