RayC

I fear that you might be right.

Something wrong, Frank? You haven't mentioned MSM lies yet. Wrt to public support of Putin's invasion of Ukraine, the floor's yours: Post a link which shows public support in Western Europe for it. (I'd advise anyone reading this post to avoid holding their breathe in anticipation of such a link unless you have a desire to suffocate yourself). Perhaps I am stupid, Frank, but the word has not yet been coined to describe your lack of intelligence if you still cling to the belief - especially in the light of Putin's recent speech - that Russia's invasion can in any way be justified.

Rubbish as usual https://www.eurofound.europa.eu/en/resources/article/2025/support-ukraine-still-high-among-eu-citizens-some-fall-apparent-among

“I have said many times that I consider the Russian and Ukrainian people to be one nation. In this sense, all of Ukraine is ours.” "There is an old rule,” he added. “‘Where a Russian soldier sets foot, that is ours’.” So there it is. Straight from the horse's mouth. All pretence gone. An admission that the invasion was a defensive measure against Western expansionism admitted by Russia's president to be nonsense and that the exact opposite is the case: This is Russian expansionism in operation. The question is, 'Will it stop at Ukraine'?

😂 Although I think that it was more a case of Pattaya being the new Costa Brava a few decades ago

Indeed. Like immigration to any country there are pros and cons. https://www.infomigrants.net/en/post/56654/spain-immigrant-labor-bridging-job-market-gaps#:~:text=Job growth for migrants is,their shared history and language.

So the data detailing that 2m (legal) immigrants arrived in Spain in 2022/23 from non-EU countries is a lie? And you know that how? They are +/-7m foreign-born nationals in Spain and you think 5m or more are on benefits. Any evidence to support that claim?

Use of the royal 'We'; illusions of grandeur, Jonny? Oh, that's right! You are the self-appointed spokesman for all indigenous, white, working-class, male Brits. To listen to you, anyone would think that crime, homelessness, etc didn't exist in the UK before the recent surge in immigration. A tired, old cliché to label that message as racist/ xenophobic? Maybe, but to use a tired, old idiom: If the shoe fits, wear it.

No. I have not denied that the Welfare State is under pressure, but to repeat for the umpteenth time, my points are 1) a (limited) open borders policy and provision of a welfare state are not mutually exclusive and 2) the UK does not operate an open border policy. These are facts. I am claiming no more or less than that. In that regard, the links which you provide are at best tangential.

Welfare State: A system whereby the state undertakes to protect the health and well-being of its citizens, especially those in financial or social need, by means of grants, pensions, and other benefits. This is what exists in the UK today. QED.

Thank you for that incisive comment.

Classic JonnyF. An angry, thinly veiled racist/xenophobic rant topped off by a snide personal attack. Nothing of substance offered. Nothing worthy of discussion. Nothing changes.

No they are not and it is completely irrational to suggest that they are. 'Mutually exclusive' means that two things cannot exist at the same time. The fact that welfare states exist and function in 27 EU states where open borders exist proves that they can co-exist. QED. So you now agree that an open borders policy and a welfare state can co-exist. You're correct: The UK does not have an 'Open Borders' policy. I'm pleased that you now agree with my original points.

The existing UK immigration policies may not be working, but whatever way you look at it the UK does NOT operate an 'Open Borders' policy. You can argue until the cows come home but that is a FACT. The UK welfare state - while far from perfect - has not collapsed. It functions. Neither here nor there. Completely irrelevant.

Look no further than Thailand

You are obviously perfectly entitled to your opinion, but it has absolutely nothing to do with my points which are: 1) the UK does not operate an 'Open Borders' immigration policy and 2) that there is evidence to suggest that operating an 'Open Borders' policy and a functioning Welfare State are mutually exclusive.

And equally there are those on the right who feel that only their voice should be heard.

Governments - both Tory and Labour - have tried to stop illegal immigration. I am talking about legal immigration: A (limited) 'Open Borders' policy and a functioning Welfare State are not mutually exclusive situations.

Come on! What could be simpler than calculating links from inches (7.92) or fathoms from yards 2.0266 (reoccurring). I blame the metric system for declining mental arithmetic skills😉

"An open border is a border that enables free movement of people and often of goods between jurisdictions with no restrictions on movement and is lacking a border control" (Wikipedia) By definition, the UK does NOT now have an 'Open Borders policy' as immigration from all countries is subject to conditions being met. As I implied, the UK did have an 'Open Borders policy' (with 27 other nations) when we were a member of the EU, and that at least partially explains the overall increase in immigration numbers between 1990 and 2020. However, as we are obviously no longer an EU member, the increase in numbers since 2020 cannot be attributed to an 'Open Borders' policy.

Why ask a priest?😉

If that were the case then the welfare state would have ceased to function while we were a member of the EU. It didn't. There is no 'open borders policy'; in fact (almost) the exact opposite. Immigration to the UK is more tightly controlled now than at any time since the early '90s as a result of Brexit and the loss of freedom of movement.

Technically, the monarch has the power to dissolve parliament at any time. In practice, he would only do so when it is requested by the PM. The chances of the King dissolving parliament without the PM requesting it simply because Reform are ahead in the polls is zero; if he were to do so there would be a constitutional crisis. If widespread protests looked like turning to civil war then I suppose it's possible but we are not remotely close to that point, although as England hasn't had a civil war for close on 400 years, it might be thought that we are due one😊

It's difficult to take anyone seriously who believes that the 'British Imperial system' still dictates world affairs and sets the world agenda. Historians argue about the precise date that the US supplanted the UK as the major power on the world stage, but surely there can be little doubt that the US has been the major force since, at the very least, the end of WW2. The idea that Breton Woods was a British Imperial instrument and that the UK government set the agenda for this event and, consequently, the world monetary system is ridiculous: it was a US construct. It is also equally ridiculous to believe that London, not Wall Street, currently dictates the world financial system.

Does it? In what way? Do you have any evidence to support that view? Does it? In what way? Do you have any evidence to support that view? Does it? In what way? Do you have any evidence to support that view? (Getting a bit repetitive this) Not based on the evidence presented by you it couldn't Of course, all the evidence presented by you points to FUBAR From the Daily Telegraph (well known bastion of DEI wokish opinion): "(In 2021) Ms Metreweli had already spent two decades in MI6, working in operational roles in Europe and crucially the Middle East. It’s safe to assume she worked in Iraq, stationed with MI6’s smallish team on the ground in Basra, as hostile an environment as there could be in the aftermath of the 2003 invasion". Do you have any evidence to support ... or never mind .....