More migrants cross Channel to Britain as political tension rises

[kingdong]

6 minutes ago, Laughing Gravy said:

And did these so called migrants/asylum seekers like many have come from all over Africa and the Middle East. These two in question actually applied for asylum in france and was refused. They are/were illegal immigrants like many are.

 

But that is the problem it does cost the tax payer a lot of money.

 

I will say it again the UK has welcomed millions of immigrants from many countries over the last 70 years. The UK is multi cultured although I personally think many facets of that and globalisation are the issues.

 

and every thing in the garden is rosy.

[simple1]

1 minute ago, Laughing Gravy said:

ou certainly like to mention forum rules don't you.

 

Yes, it contributes to a civil dialogue 

[kingdong]

12 minutes ago, Laughing Gravy said:

And did these so called migrants/asylum seekers like many have come from all over Africa and the Middle East. These two in question actually applied for asylum in france and was refused. They are/were illegal immigrants like many are.

 

But that is the problem it does cost the tax payer a lot of money.

 

I will say it again the UK has welcomed millions of immigrants from many countries over the last 70 years. The UK is multi cultured although I personally think many facets of that and globalisation are the issues.

 

seen the latest figures for britains debt pertaining to the corona panademic? will cost the tax payer a lot more money.

Edited August 22, 2020 by kingdong

[stevenl]

10 minutes ago, Laughing Gravy said:

I don't care if you accept my viewpoints or not. You certainly like to mention forum rules don't you.

 

As I said do your own research which you did, albeit minimally.

 

There is a fine line between migrant and asylum seeker, which many abuse and use to their advantage whenever they feel.

 

So we disagree on the asylum seeker/migrant situation. That's fine. Move on and have a nice day. I certainly will.

Problem is your viewpoints are purely opinion, devoid of any factual basis.

 

But at least you're honest about your reason for brexit.

Edited August 22, 2020 by stevenl

[luckyluke]

9 minutes ago, kingdong said:

like to think so but wouldn't hold your breath.

And that's it.

Many of us wish things would change.

In Europe we resign that it won't.

The U.K. has now the opportunity.

Will see, however I think we will continue to read here how it should be, and what should been done.

Not what effectively changed.

[theoldgit]

Troll post praising violence removed.

[Rookiescot]

Are people still flogging this dead squirrel?

Look the entire thing is a non event. Migrants who make it across  the channel will be detained and processed. If you are not happy with the way they are processed then take it up with Johnson and the Conservative party. They have been in power for the last decade.

If an immigrant is not detained upon arrival then he will have no access to benefits or housing. Thereby costing the UK public zero pence.

Brexiteers venting their spleen over what is essentially just a distraction from what is going on regarding the UK are simply responding to a dog whistle. 

[kingdong]

8 minutes ago, Rookiescot said:

Are people still flogging this dead squirrel?

Look the entire thing is a non event. Migrants who make it across  the channel will be detained and processed. If you are not happy with the way they are processed then take it up with Johnson and the Conservative party. They have been in power for the last decade.

If an immigrant is not detained upon arrival then he will have no access to benefits or housing. Thereby costing the UK public zero pence.

Brexiteers venting their spleen over what is essentially just a distraction from what is going on regarding the UK are simply responding to a dog whistle. 

detained in a 4 star hotel when we,ve our own citizens living on the street? no wonder the natives are restless.

[luckyluke]

Kingdong, what confused you in my post 126 please ?

 

[Rookiescot]

9 minutes ago, kingdong said:

detained in a 4 star hotel when we,ve our own citizens living on the street? no wonder the natives are restless.

Then take it up with Johnson and the Conservatives.

[kingdong]

5 minutes ago, luckyluke said:

Kingdong, what confused you in my post 126 please ?

 

the content

[mokwit]

1 hour ago, simple1 said:

Not so sure about the 'good natured people of the UK' when reading the posts over the years concerning asylum seekers.

Seems to me he British people are open minded to accepting true refugees, but sick of this pack of lies about the true nature of those seeking to come to the UK from the Left/Liberal media who have their own motives, along with the immigration/refugee industry that pays a lot of mortgages on nice houses (Head of Save the Children which was picking up adult economic migrants in the Med is on GBP 340k PA).

 

FYI here is one of my sources, myself. For three years I lived in an apartment block used as a holding tank by people smugglers. All you pro "refugee" bleeding hearts are being played for fools by schemers who have got it all worked out. The two guys across from me from Niger who were waiting to be smuggled to the US were decent guys who I would stop and chat with - their English was such that they may actually have been "Doctor and Engineers", but they were economic migrants not refugees.

 

In common, I suspect, with many from the UK posting on this board, I remain open minded to genuine refugees coming to the UK, and refugee is not defined just by fleeing war or murderous Government. People whose lives are at risk from persecution, or where it may escalate to that e.g. Christians in Muslim countries, such as the Pakistani Christians, those Christians in some areas of Indonesia. Minority tribes dominated by a different tribe majority as in Africa are also legitimately refugees if there is persecution by the majority. The question arises as to whether that sanctuary needs to be permanent in the form of citizenship. In some cases, yes, in others, why?. One assumes those fleeing war will want to return when a war ends if political conditions permit. People fleeing their countries peacetime National Service is not a grounds for acceptance even though their desire to flee might be understandable. There is the issue of numbers also. How many can we realistically accommodate?. Somalians as a group have done poorly in the UK, 90% of males and 99% of females are on welfare. The question arises under what conditions should people be under before we accept them suspecting they will permanently be a burden on the state, and even when felt justified on ethical/compassionate reasons, the question of how many arises.

 

Before I go, Here is another of my sources: I had a Twitter conversation with a Labour MP (Stella Creasey) who was pro Calais "refugee" about the Labour/Liberal Media claims of "3,000 unaccompanied children" in Calais. When I challenged her she admitted that when she was there she met with ONE 9 year old who had no adults with her at the time of the interview, and saw another 9 year old who seemed to be unaccompanied. From 3,000 to 2. At least she was honest when challenged, but seemingly not until. The problem is that many in the pro "refugee" camp are not, or are being played for fools by the dishonest media/politicians.

 

My mistake for breaking my self imposed posting moratorium. Should not have done it.

[kingdong]

4 minutes ago, Rookiescot said:

Then take it up with Johnson and the Conservatives.

was merely addressing the point you raised me old china,as for your suggestion have really got better things to do with my time.

[luckyluke]

2 minutes ago, kingdong said:

the content

I suppose with this you believe that, contrary to the E.U., the U.K., next year, will implement rules and regulations making the acceptance of "refugees" more difficult.

You may be right;

it is not my opinion,

so we will have to wait and see.

 

Or to you mean something else with " the content" ?

 

 

 

[kingdong]

5 minutes ago, mokwit said:

Seems to me he British people are open minded to accepting true refugees, but sick of this pack of lies about the true nature of those seeking to come to the UK from the Left/Liberal media who have their own motives, along with the immigration/refugee industry that pays a lot of mortgages on nice houses (Head of Save the Children which was picking up adult economic migrants in the Med is on GBP 340k PA).

 

FYI here is one of my sources, myself. For three years I lived in an apartment block used as a holding tank by people smugglers. All you pro "refugee" bleeding hearts are being played for fools by schemers who have got it all worked out. The two guys across from me from Niger who were waiting to be smuggled to the US were decent guys who I would stop and chat with - their English was such that they may actually have been "Doctor and Engineers", but they were economic migrants not refugees.

 

In common, I suspect, with many from the UK posting on this board, I remain open minded to genuine refugees coming to the UK, and refugee is not defined just by fleeing war or murderous Government. People whose lives are at risk from persecution, or where it may escalate to that e.g. Christians in Muslim countries, such as the Pakistani Christians, those Christians in some areas of Indonesia. Minority tribes dominated by a different tribe majority as in Africa are also legitimately refugees if there is persecution by the majority. The question arises as to whether that sanctuary needs to be permanent in the form of citizenship. In some cases, yes, in others, why?. One assumes those fleeing war will want to return when a war ends if political conditions permit. People fleeing their countries peacetime National Service is not a grounds for acceptance even though their desire to flee might be understandable. There is the issue of numbers also. How many can we realistically accommodate?. Somalians as a group have done poorly in the UK, 90% of males and 99% of females are on welfare. The question arises under what conditions should people be under before we accept them suspecting they will permanently be a burden on the state, and even when felt justified on ethical/compassionate reasons, the question of how many arises.

 

Before I go, Here is another of my sources: I had a Twitter conversation with a Labour MP (Stella Creasey) who was pro Calais "refugee" about the Labour/Liberal Media claims of "3,000 unaccompanied children" in Calais. When I challenged her she admitted that when she was there she met with ONE 9 year old who had no adults with her at the time of the interview, and saw another 9 year old who seemed to be unaccompanied. From 3,000 to 2. At least she was honest when challenged, but seemingly not until. The problem is that many in the pro "refugee" camp are not, or are being played for fools by the dishonest media/politicians.

 

My mistake for breaking my self imposed posting moratorium. Should not have done it.

i lived in a previous british colony and when the british government at the time sold it down the river it left a lot of africans who had fought ( as it turned out ) on the wrong side to be tortured and murdered as were a lot of matabele in tribal genocide,link. cry of the !ost people by donald trelford

[kingdong]

6 minutes ago, luckyluke said:

I suppose with this you believe that, contrary to the E.U., the U.K., next year, will implement rules and regulations making the acceptance of "refugees" more difficult.

You may be right;

it is not my opinion,

so we will have to wait and see.

 

Or to you mean something else with " the content" ?

 

 

 

to be brutally frank old boy,am even more confused than your original post left me

[luckyluke]

1 minute ago, kingdong said:

to be brutally frank old boy,am even more confused than your original post left me

Well I am afraid than that :

- there is something wrong with your comprehension abilities.

- being a non native English speaker, the way I express myself is too elementary for you.

[Rimmer]

A spelling police post and a reply have been removed

[simple1]

1 hour ago, mokwit said:

Seems to me he British people are open minded to accepting true refugees, but sick of this pack of lies about the true nature of those seeking to come to the UK from the Left/Liberal media who have their own motives, along with the immigration/refugee industry that pays a lot of mortgages on nice houses (Head of Save the Children which was picking up adult economic migrants in the Med is on GBP 340k PA).

 

FYI here is one of my sources, myself. For three years I lived in an apartment block used as a holding tank by people smugglers. All you pro "refugee" bleeding hearts are being played for fools by schemers who have got it all worked out. The two guys across from me from Niger who were waiting to be smuggled to the US were decent guys who I would stop and chat with - their English was such that they may actually have been "Doctor and Engineers", but they were economic migrants not refugees.

 

In common, I suspect, with many from the UK posting on this board, I remain open minded to genuine refugees coming to the UK, and refugee is not defined just by fleeing war or murderous Government. People whose lives are at risk from persecution, or where it may escalate to that e.g. Christians in Muslim countries, such as the Pakistani Christians, those Christians in some areas of Indonesia. Minority tribes dominated by a different tribe majority as in Africa are also legitimately refugees if there is persecution by the majority. The question arises as to whether that sanctuary needs to be permanent in the form of citizenship. In some cases, yes, in others, why?. One assumes those fleeing war will want to return when a war ends if political conditions permit. People fleeing their countries peacetime National Service is not a grounds for acceptance even though their desire to flee might be understandable. There is the issue of numbers also. How many can we realistically accommodate?. Somalians as a group have done poorly in the UK, 90% of males and 99% of females are on welfare. The question arises under what conditions should people be under before we accept them suspecting they will permanently be a burden on the state, and even when felt justified on ethical/compassionate reasons, the question of how many arises.

 

Before I go, Here is another of my sources: I had a Twitter conversation with a Labour MP (Stella Creasey) who was pro Calais "refugee" about the Labour/Liberal Media claims of "3,000 unaccompanied children" in Calais. When I challenged her she admitted that when she was there she met with ONE 9 year old who had no adults with her at the time of the interview, and saw another 9 year old who seemed to be unaccompanied. From 3,000 to 2. At least she was honest when challenged, but seemingly not until. The problem is that many in the pro "refugee" camp are not, or are being played for fools by the dishonest media/politicians.

 

My mistake for breaking my self imposed posting moratorium. Should not have done it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Due to your prior extremist posts have no interest whatsoever to reply

Edited August 22, 2020 by simple1

[mokwit]

20 minutes ago, simple1 said:

Commentary with insults, hearsay, right wing rants. - surely you don't expect a reply to your nonsense.

We are not required to post on this board in keeping with how a single member demands we should, nor are we bound by anyone's 'opinion corridor' as some seem to think. Separate from any forum rules, there are limits, but those should be the limits of broad society, not those trying to be imposed by someone that reflect their political position. If someone thinks something is a 'right wing rant' or 'nonsense' that is more likely a reflection of their own political position. Non acceptance of the Lefts' mass voter importation does not make anyone 'right wing', it makes them pro democracy.

HTH. If you don't like it......................

Edited August 22, 2020 by mokwit

[simple1]

21 minutes ago, mokwit said:

We are not required to post on this board in keeping with how a single member demands we should, nor are we bound by anyone's 'opinion corridor' as some seem to think. Separate from any forum rules, there are limits, but those should be the limits of broad society, not those trying to be imposed by someone that reflect their political position. If someone thinks something is a 'right wing rant' or 'nonsense' that is more likely a reflection of their own political position. Non acceptance of the Lefts' mass voter importation does not make anyone 'right wing', it makes them pro democracy.

HTH. If you don't like it......................

Absolutely correct you and others are able to post your POV's, within forum rules, at the same time one is able to reject your ideology, within forum rules.

 

Lefts' mass voter importation 

 

I usually vote centre right. Never heard of such a matter highlighted above, must be a component of the conspiracy world, to put it politely, right of centre, right lives. Time to move along - bye

[Laughing Gravy]

3 hours ago, simple1 said:

Yes, it contributes to a civil dialogue 

I often find it is those who use it as they have a weak argument and try to stifle the dialogue.

[Laughing Gravy]

3 hours ago, kingdong said:

seen the latest figures for britains debt pertaining to the corona panademic? will cost the tax payer a lot more money.

But since Blair and his idiotic open border policy it has cost the UK lots and lots of money. So more migrants are just going to add to the troubles but some posters here don't mind and they have the Lilly Allen and Bob Geldof attitude but they never let those stay in their spare bedrooms in the mansions that they own.

[Loiner]

15 minutes ago, Laughing Gravy said:

I often find it is those who use it as they have a weak argument and try to stifle the dialogue.

They seem to think this is their Safe Space. If that doesn't work for them, they will also have a go at No-platforming or cancelling. Why don't they simply use the ignore button if they are so offended?

[simple1]

40 minutes ago, Loiner said:

<SNIP> Why don't they simply use the ignore button if they are so offended?

TVF is a debate platform, using the 'ignore' function, especially in World News, is counter to conversation and would enable some members to dominate with one particular political ideology / conspiracy theories.

[simple1]

7 minutes ago, mokwit said:

Oh good, I look forward to some robust debate rather than people refusing to debate by resorting to name calling e.g. saying I'm not going to reply because you are 'right wing'.

 

 

 

Pot, kettle, black. You seriously trying to claim you're not 'right of centre'. However, no point in 'debating' with members who only post opinions / hearsay, whatever and refuse to post credible factual links. 

Edited August 22, 2020 by simple1

[Rimmer]

Off topic bickering posts removed. Please stay on topic:

 

More migrants cross Channel to Britain as political tension rises

[Laughing Gravy]

On 8/22/2020 at 8:17 AM, simple1 said:

 

What link are you referring to?

 

Not so sure about the 'good natured people of the UK' when reading the posts over the years concerning asylum seekers. For sure non qualifying asylum seekers will be using false statement / ID, don't know the current percentages of genuine asylum seekers versus those rejected arriving in the UK, do you? If you do, facts please not rants.

Here is a fact for the gullible who walk around with their heads in the clouds.

 

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/quarter-of-child-migrants-deemed-to-be-over-18-7qcdlwrhx

[Loiner]

59 minutes ago, Laughing Gravy said:

Here is a fact for the gullible who walk around with their heads in the clouds.

 

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/quarter-of-child-migrants-deemed-to-be-over-18-7qcdlwrhx

There's no such thing as unaccompanied child migrants. If really under 18 they are runaways, who should be returned to mum and dad. Or they are liars, who must be immediately repatriated without question.

[sirocco]

loiner post 151

It's a joke, isn't it.
On this Monday morning, you wanted the week to be a lot of fun for all Internet users.
Thank you for this delicate kindness