19 minutes ago, madone said:

 

I was taking the piss, but i do not share your faith in Britain and more than i beleive in the US.

 

Those uneducated idiots are the most easily turned to violence.

 

Take a look around you, peace is fragile right now -- it's just too easy to manipulate folks when every moment of their lives is media-saturated. 

 

Well that's certainly a better response than your first one.

I don't disagree that 'Those uneducated idiots are the most easily turned to violence', manipulated by far-right dog whistles and click-bait nonsense such as this article, but I do have faith that most DECENT Brits can see through a lot of this nonsense and any violence will be isolated and quickly dealt with. It's the oldest trick in the book though, perpetuated by idiot politicians like Farage - your problems aren't because of those in power - it's because of that brown guy down the road who although just trying to do the same as you and look after himself and his family is somehow the reason there's not enough council houses or why the NHS is struggling.

 

Right-wing, sensationalist and VERY obvious nonsense.  

 

NB - for any of our American or Australian or other nationalities who don't know what the Daily Mail is (where this 'article' comes from) it is rated 'biased right' with 'a sensationalist, tabloid bent, often choosing to highlight individual stories that elicit shock or heightened emotions.'  https://www.allsides.com/news-source/daily-mail

18 minutes ago, Summerinsiam said:

The undisputable fact is that the vast majority of migrants to the UK are there legally, and it is widely recognised that they are needed to support its economy and public services. 

 

That's the way immigration used to work.  But those numbers are from before they could bypass any legal formalities and just hop on an inflatable.

 

1 minute ago, johnnybangkok said:

DECENT Brits can see through a lot of this nonsense and any violence will be isolated and quickly dealt with.

 

But who are these DECENT Brits, the aging population of xenophobes, (not so) closeted bigots, and pro-Brexitiers, or the burgeoning, trout-faced influencer class?

4 minutes ago, impulse said:

 

That's the way immigration used to work.  But that's from before they could bypass any legal formalities and just hop on an inflatable.

 

How can they 'bypass any legal formalities'? Are you conflating asylum seekers with illegal immigrants? 

1 minute ago, madone said:

 

But who are these DECENT Brits, the aging population of xenophobes, (not so) closeted bigots, and pro-Brexitiers, or the burgeoning, trout-faced influencer class?

There are 54 million adults in the UK. I still reckon (but it's anecdotal) there are far more decent people than there are 'xenophobes, closeted bigots, and pro-Brexitiers.' Especially now that Brexit has been show to be the complete disaster we all told them it would be and DIDN'T do a single thing to stop the boats and the illegal immigrants from OUTSIDE the EU.

Lot of buyer remorse amongst many of them.

2 minutes ago, johnnybangkok said:

How can they 'bypass any legal formalities'? Are you conflating asylum seekers with illegal immigrants? 

 

You mean those military age males on the inflatables?  If they're seeking asylum, why aren't they taking their families out of danger, too? 

 

If they're just economic migrants, it makes perfect sense.

 

 

The British were warned by Enoch Powell decades ago what would happen - and they chose to ignore him and instead he was branded a racist and old fashioned.  Now the UK are swimming in that failure and are in very serious trouble with no rope or a life raft in sight.  There is only one solution and it is clear and obvious - do what they do in USA (now) and China and Russia and Hungary and Argentina (now) and Japan and Korea etc etc - stop immigration to only what the country really needs, and actively deport all illegal migrants.  Woke liberal left-wing politicians know they will vote for them if they are given voting rights - and that is the only reason they support them coming - if they all voted right wing they would have been stopped decades ago.    

2 hours ago, impulse said:

 

You mean those military age males on the inflatables?  If they're seeking asylum, why aren't they taking their families out of danger, too? 

 

If they're just economic migrants, it makes perfect sense.

 

 

You have nothing other than anecdotal observations and your ill-informed right-wing bias to try and 'summarise' a VERY complex matter.

 

Often asylum seekers send the husband first as it costs less, he is more able to make the journey and has less chance of being raped and/or human trafficked. Once he is granted asylum, he can then apply for a family reunion visa which is for partners and children of those granted protection.  The initial granting of asylum is what the investigations are basically about and the family reunion visa requires another investigation.

 

No one denying there are 'economic migrants' but those should be assessed and deported asap but with a wait list of 91,000 (the real problem), that's not happening nearly quick enough.

 

And just for your own information as you seem to be completely ill-informed on this subject, in 2024, 40,000 asylum seekers (slightly more than a third) arrived in the UK on a valid visa before then claiming asylum. About the same number arrived via small boats and the rest came through applying in advance or through safe and legal routes for resettlement, such as the Afghan resettlement program (which resettled 7,800 refugees in 2024) 

 

On 6/23/2025 at 8:34 AM, JonnyF said:

 

I'm sure the usual gaslighters will be along shortly to tell us we are imagining all of this. 

 

 

 

No, the Daily Mail is.

1 hour ago, TroubleandGrumpy said:

The British were warned by Enoch Powell decades ago what would happen - and they chose to ignore him and instead he was branded a racist and old fashioned.  Now the UK are swimming in that failure and are in very serious trouble with no rope or a life raft in sight.  There is only one solution and it is clear and obvious - do what they do in USA (now) and China and Russia and Hungary and Argentina (now) and Japan and Korea etc etc - stop immigration to only what the country really needs, and actively deport all illegal migrants.  Woke liberal left-wing politicians know they will vote for them if they are given voting rights - and that is the only reason they support them coming - if they all voted right wing they would have been stopped decades ago.    

Powell made THAT speech in 1968 so 57 years later his 'prophecy' still hasn't come true and I seriously doubt it ever will.  And whilst we are on the subject of predictable nonsense, you assert that it's 'voting rights - and that is the only reason they support them coming' as being the major reason this is happening (nonsense of course) so would you consider the Tories to be 'woke liberal left-wing politicians' as out of those 57 years , the Tories have been in power for 36 of them. This includes 14 years up to the end of 2024.

So are the Tories now 'woke liberal left-wing politicians?'

  

1 hour ago, TroubleandGrumpy said:

The British were warned by Enoch Powell decades ago what would happen - and they chose to ignore him and instead he was branded a racist and old fashioned.  Now the UK are swimming in that failure and are in very serious trouble with no rope or a life raft in sight.  There is only one solution and it is clear and obvious - do what they do in USA (now) and China and Russia and Hungary and Argentina (now) and Japan and Korea etc etc - stop immigration to only what the country really needs, and actively deport all illegal migrants.  Woke liberal left-wing politicians know they will vote for them if they are given voting rights - and that is the only reason they support them coming - if they all voted right wing they would have been stopped decades ago.    

Enoch Powell was old-fashioned and racist!  There can be no doubt about that.  

2 minutes ago, brewsterbudgen said:

Enoch Powell was old-fashioned and racist!  There can be no doubt about that.  

 

It seems that the only people attracted to his 'prophecy' these days are the old-fashioned racists. You know who you are.

23 hours ago, MalcolmB said:

We have grown up in the UK and had every opportunity to make a go of it.

If we are homeless we have no one to blame but ourselves, poor choices and laziness.

 

Refugees who have fled dangerous places with only the shirts on the backs need a leg up when first arriving. Then they develop into tax paying citzens and business owners creating more jobs.

 

I would rather my tax dollars going to them than the laziest 5% of Brits with their hand out who will never make anything of themselves and will be a burden on the rest of us for their entire life.

Congratulations on posting the most unpopular post in the history of the forum.  And so wrong too.

 

Before I left the UK I used to do voluntary work for the Crisis charity, setting up kitchens and providing clothing for people living on the streets.  The majority were either ex forces men who couldn't adjust to civilian life, divorcees who lost everything or people who's addiction ruined their life.  There's no effective safety net in the UK for the people who silently fall.

 

But the loud minorities consume all the available support.

6 minutes ago, NanLaew said:

 

It seems that the only people attracted to his 'prophecy' these days are the old-fashioned racists. You know who you are.

 

I would  not disagree with that at all.......but, there was some truth and some vision in his words. His racist core ensured that his views received no traction.

 

 

23 hours ago, MalcolmB said:

We have grown up in the UK and had every opportunity to make a go of it.

If we are homeless we have no one to blame but ourselves, poor choices and laziness.

 

Refugees who have fled dangerous places with only the shirts on the backs need a leg up when first arriving. Then they develop into tax paying citzens and business owners creating more jobs.

 

I would rather my tax dollars going to them than the laziest 5% of Brits with their hand out who will never make anything of themselves and will be a burden on the rest of us for their entire life.

 

Got that right.

 

21 hours ago, Magictoad said:

This is entirely true. Indigenous British are being left behind in the social housing lists to be replaced by Somalians and their large families, often as many as nine. So the Brits don't stand a chance. We also have the issue of thousands of people coming over by boat being shortlisted for homes. The latter are primarily Muslim men ranging from 15 to 30 who have not been socialised for living in a western culture. They are housed en masse in hotels where they cause a danger to the communities  in which they reside.

 

Such a vivid imagination.

 

20 hours ago, Summerinsiam said:

I agree, but the housing shortage is due to primarily to a decades long failure in housing policy and the fact that  not enough affordable homes have been built to keep pace with population growth and changes in household formation. It has nothing to do with asylum seekers or people coming across the channel on dinghies. Lol. Blaming such problems on them is just lazy, incorrect and the playbook of the far-right It is far from bs. You really should read more widely and check your facts.

 

Serial neglect by serial governments from both major political parties (and an also-ran).

 

6 hours ago, BritManToo said:

Not enough houses being built is government policy.

No problem covering the countryside with solar panels and wind farms, but don't try and get planning permission to build some houses or park any mobile homes!

 

Spot on. The builders of the housing projects that do get approved are not required to fulfill any quota of affordable housing, just 2, 3 and 4 bedroom detached homes in the suburbs.

 

6 hours ago, JAG said:

Margaret Thatcher left government 35 years ago. Since then we have had various Tory administrations and 13 years of Labour under Blair and Brown.

 

Blaming her for the current (2025) housing shortage is a bit like blaming Henry VIII for the decline in Sunday church attendance in the Church of England!

 

True, but her sell-off triggered the avalanche.

 

6 hours ago, brewsterbudgen said:

ChatGPT is a rather better source than the Daily Mail!

 

British local authorities don’t allocate council (social) housing to asylum seekers the way they do for local homeless people. The systems involved are quite separate, but asylum seekers do rely heavily on temporary or emergency accommodation — often putting extra pressure on housing services, even though it’s not the same as social housing.

---

🏠 1. Council Housing vs. Asylum Accommodation

• Council (social) housing:

  • Run by councils or housing associations.

  • Eligibility is based on criteria like income, savings, local connection.

  • Asylum seekers are ineligible and cannot join waiting lists.

  • Around 90% of social lets go to UK nationals.

• Asylum seeker accommodation:

  • Provided by the Home Office, not through social housing schemes.

  • Includes hotels, hostels, private-sector housing via contracts

  • Intended only as temporary housing while claims are processed.

---

🆘 2. Support After Recognition

Once asylum is granted, people must leave Home Office housing (typically within 28 days, now extended to 56 days). Then:

• They can apply to local councils for homelessness help, not council housing per se 

• Numbers have surged: e.g., over 9,500 refugee households needed council help in 2023, up from ~3,300 in 2022 

• In some areas (like Glasgow), up to half of new homeless people are refugees.

---

⚠️ 3. Homeless Local Families Often First in Line

• Local homeless individuals/families, especially those in priority need (children, risk, disability, etc.), are legally entitled to council-provided temporary accommodation, and possibly permanent social housing.

• But councils face chronic shortages and funding pressures — often resorting to gatekeeping, delaying or denying help

---

📊 Summary Comparison

Group	Council Housing Access	Temporary Accommodation
Local homeless people	✅ Eligible (means-tested)	✅ Councils must accommodate them under homelessness law
Asylum seekers (in flight)	❌ Ineligible	✅ Provided by Home Office (hotels, contracts)
Recognised refugees	❌ May apply as homeless	✅ Councils must consider them; growing numbers request help

 

---

🔍 4. What’s Driving the Debate?

• Tension and misconceptions: With rising numbers of recognised refugees seeking council help, some locals worry they’re “jumping the queue.” But that's misunderstanding: asylum seekers haven’t queued for council housing — refugees are entering the homelessness process .

• Council strain: Many areas are overwhelmed. For example, Glasgow asked the Home Office to pause dispersals due to acute housing pressure — asylum housing costs are £26.5 m this year and rising

---

✅ Conclusion

• Council/social housing is primarily reserved for UK or settled residents and is not used to house asylum seekers.

• However, once asylum seekers receive refugee status and lose government-provided housing, they often turn to council homelessness services, which are already under severe strain.

• This may indirectly reduce housing availability for local homeless—due to scarcity, not preferential policy.

 

I like a bit of fact finding in the morning. Well done, but I fear your words will fall on deaf ears.

 

4 hours ago, frank83628 said:

UK residents have to join a queue and wait fir something to become available, asylum seekers will be housed quicker as government pays full price for accomodation 356 days including food.

So essentially asylum seekers get better treatment

 

...like the above.

 

3 hours ago, zyphodb said:

 

Complete nonsense, I can't remember the exact number but over several years, several million homes and flats were sold off, and the councils were not allowed to use the money to replace them. The UK has been very short of affordable places to rent, ever since...

 

The 'avalanche' in a nutshell.

 

3 hours ago, Summerinsiam said:

The undisputable fact is that the vast majority of migrants to the UK are there legally, and it is widely recognised that they are needed to support its economy and public services. 

 

Yes, and while they are doing those jobs that the average Brit eschews, the 'hardworking' white folks jet off on Ryanair for a(nother) weekend on the piss in Magaluf.

1 hour ago, johnnybangkok said:

Often asylum seekers send the husband first as it costs less, he is more able to make the journey and has less chance of being raped and/or human trafficked. Once he is granted asylum, he can then apply for a family reunion visa which is for partners and children of those granted protection.  The initial granting of asylum is what the investigations are basically about and the family reunion visa requires another investigation.

 

If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck, it's probably a duck.  It's the same with economic migrants.  

 

Just out of curiosity, what horrors in France may those inflatable riders be trying to seek asylum from?

 

13 minutes ago, impulse said:

 

If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck, it's probably a duck.  It's the same with economic migrants.  

 

Just out of curiosity, what horrors in France may those inflatable riders be trying to seek asylum from?

 

I'll let AI answer that for you:- 

 

Asylum seekers may choose to leave France for the UK due to a combination of factors including the perception of better economic opportunities, family connections, language, and cultural ties, despite France receiving more asylum applications and refugees overall. While some may find conditions in northern France difficult, the UK also faces challenges in managing its asylum system and providing adequate support, with some asylum seekers facing destitution and inadequate living conditions. Here's a more detailed breakdown:

 

Factors influencing the decision to leave France for the UK:

• Economic Opportunities:

The UK is perceived as having a larger "shadow economy" and more opportunities for informal work, even if poorly paid, than France. 

• Family and Community Ties:

Many asylum seekers have family members or strong connections within the UK's large diaspora and ethnic minority communities. 

• Language:

English is more widely spoken in the UK than French, making it a more appealing destination for those who have learned English. 

• Cultural and Historical Factors:

Some asylum seekers may have pre-existing ties to the UK due to historical connections, such as former British colonies. 

4 minutes ago, johnnybangkok said:

I'll let AI answer that for you:- 

 

Asylum seekers may choose to leave France for the UK due to a combination of factors including the perception of better economic opportunities, family connections, language, and cultural ties, despite France receiving more asylum applications and refugees overall. While some may find conditions in northern France difficult, the UK also faces challenges in managing its asylum system and providing adequate support, with some asylum seekers facing destitution and inadequate living conditions. Here's a more detailed breakdown:

 

Factors influencing the decision to leave France for the UK:

• Economic Opportunities:

The UK is perceived as having a larger "shadow economy" and more opportunities for informal work, even if poorly paid, than France. 

• Family and Community Ties:

Many asylum seekers have family members or strong connections within the UK's large diaspora and ethnic minority communities. 

• Language:

English is more widely spoken in the UK than French, making it a more appealing destination for those who have learned English. 

• Cultural and Historical Factors:

Some asylum seekers may have pre-existing ties to the UK due to historical connections, such as former British colonies. 

 

So, basically they're economic migrants.  In search of better living conditions. 

 

Because asylum seekers are legally required to apply in the first safe country they land in.

 

22 hours ago, Summerinsiam said:

Yet more right-wing clickbait..

And your take on the commentary?

Perhaps you could strike out and do something most luvvies struggle with - discuss the content, not the source.

On 6/23/2025 at 7:34 AM, Mr Meeseeks said:

There's going to be a massive backlash against this and rightly so.

 

Civil unrest is already starting. Southport, Ballymena, etc. 

 

Deportations of millions is now a moderate viewpoint.

 

Remigration is inevitable. 

The UK is on the verge of a very bad situation lets just say that. It is a balance that could tilt in either direction. Unfortunately I cant see it going in the good direction.

4 hours ago, johnnybangkok said:

At last - an educated voice over the din of the far-right nonsense being spouted so far. 

I will also add another salient point. One of the main reason there is such a problem with asylum seekers is the backlog in processing, created initially through Covid but still continues to present time. https://migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources/briefings/the-uks-asylum-backlog/ . 'In 2024, the UK saw a record number of asylum applications, with 108,138 applications received, representing 18% more than in 2023. This figure includes both main applicants and their dependents. At the end of 2024, the UK's asylum backlog stood at approximately 91,000 applications awaiting an initial decision - however, also in 2024 there were 8,164 enforced returns to another country, an increase of 28% on the previous year (6,361), there were 25,186 voluntary returns, up by 24% compared to 2023, 23,009 were refused entry at port and subsequently departed (‘port returns’) and in 2024 and there were 5,034 foreign national offenders returns made in 2024, which is an increase of 25% compared to the previous year.'   https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/immigration-system-statistics-year-ending-december-2024/how-many-people-are-returned-from-the-uk

As brewsterbudgen has pointed out, whilst being processed, asylum seekers have to be temporarily housed (they don't get social/council houses) racking up a huge bill, but when approved, they then apply for social housing, putting a huge strain on local councils who have neither the money nor the houses to offer. And before you all start crapping on about 'preferential treatment', ALL applications are given the same rigorous criteria which prioritises those with the greatest housing need, with a focus on families, homelessness, poor living conditions, health and welfare, and specific vulnerable groups. The idea that asylum seekers get priority is plain wrong - when they are ready for social housing they go through the exact same process as a UK person and get no preferential treatment.  https://www.reuters.com/fact-check/migrants-will-not-get-priority-over-britons-social-housing-says-government-2024-09-30/   

And for the likes of JohnnyF getting his usual dig into the Labour government (who have only been in power for 6 months) or the other poster saying not to blame Thatcher, first Thatcher initiated the 'right-to- buy' council houses policy (without replacing council stock) which started all of this and the Tories have had 14 years to sort all this out but were so obsessed with the abject failure that is Brexit, they have done literally nothing but let this build up to what is now a crisis point.  

You don't need review and processing if you enter the country illegally. Kick them out, no review and give them the promise of never being allowed to return.

29 minutes ago, Photoguy21 said:

The UK is on the verge of a very bad situation lets just say that. It is a balance that could tilt in either direction. Unfortunately I cant see it going in the good direction.

 

My fear is that it's going to go against those brought up with a sense of fair play.  Marquess of Queensbury and all. 

 

They may win in the long term, but there's going to be a lot of cheap shots and pain and grooming and stabbings in the meantime.

 

4 hours ago, johnnybangkok said:

Well that's certainly a better response than your first one.

I don't disagree that 'Those uneducated idiots are the most easily turned to violence', manipulated by far-right dog whistles and click-bait nonsense such as this article, but I do have faith that most DECENT Brits can see through a lot of this nonsense and any violence will be isolated and quickly dealt with. It's the oldest trick in the book though, perpetuated by idiot politicians like Farage - your problems aren't because of those in power - it's because of that brown guy down the road who although just trying to do the same as you and look after himself and his family is somehow the reason there's not enough council houses or why the NHS is struggling.

 

Right-wing, sensationalist and VERY obvious nonsense.  

 

NB - for any of our American or Australian or other nationalities who don't know what the Daily Mail is (where this 'article' comes from) it is rated 'biased right' with 'a sensationalist, tabloid bent, often choosing to highlight individual stories that elicit shock or heightened emotions.'  https://www.allsides.com/news-source/daily-mail

Oh dear, thanks for the education, Johnny.

So Daily Mail is the polar opposite of BBC, The Guardian, ABC, The Sydney Morning Herald, Washington Post, The New York Times, CNN, Los Angeles Times and all those other tired old media, which cling to their steadily declining base who sleep smugly at night knowing they are clever and compassionate while the others are so cruel and evil.

Go Johnny, only you know what a smart person you truly are.

1 hour ago, impulse said:

 

So, basically they're economic migrants.  In search of better living conditions. 

 

Because asylum seekers are legally required to apply in the first safe country they land in.

 

Some of them are. Others are not. I don't think I've denied this and in fact said in one of my posts 'No one denying there are 'economic migrants' but those should be assessed and deported asap but with a wait list of 91,000 (the real problem), that's not happening nearly quick enough.'

 

If this was your big 'gotcha' moment then I'm happy to disappoint.

2 hours ago, brewsterbudgen said:

Enoch Powell was old-fashioned and racist!  There can be no doubt about that.  

 

Very low resolution understanding of the man.

 

When he was an officer in India, his best friend was an Indian officer. When they both went to the British officers' mess together, and everyone told his friend to get out, he replied 'If he goes, I go' and went to sit with his friend in the Indian officers' mess.

 

After he returned to the UK, he invited said same officer to spend christmas with him every year until he died. Does that sound like a racist to you?

 

Enoch Powell was a highly intelligent, educated and articulate man. He was well versed in history and the politics of the time, namely the wars in Israel-Palestine and India-Pakistan and the civil rights movement in America. It was these things which led to his concerns about immigration.

 

Now we are seeing the settler-colonialism of the UK (predominantly England) by Arab muslims who cluster in settlements / enclaves which, thanks to our electoral system, give them disproportionate electoral power. The power is effectively in the hands of the Imams, who instruct the men on how to vote, who in turn instruct their women and children; ironically, the patriarchy which we are supposed to despise. 🤔

 

Already we have local councillors elected on the 'Gaza ticket', who shout 'allahu akbar...free Palestine' as a war cry, a Pakistani mayor who cries 'I represent the people of Pakistan' to her constituents, people being prosecuted for burning the Koran and a law against 'Islamophobia' in the making. 

13 minutes ago, Donga said:

Oh dear, thanks for the education, Johnny.

So Daily Mail is the polar opposite of BBC, The Guardian, ABC, The Sydney Morning Herald, Washington Post, The New York Times, CNN, Los Angeles Times and all those other tired old media, which cling to their steadily declining base who sleep smugly at night knowing they are clever and compassionate while the others are so cruel and evil.

Go Johnny, only you know what a smart person you truly are.

Isn't it just amazing how all of the papers you quoted (don't know much about The Sydney Morning Herald though but I'm assuming it's of the same ilk) were very recently the bastion of great journalism until Trump and the far-right started with all the 'fake-news' BS. It's like something straight out of Lawrence Britt's, 'Fascism, Anyone?' written in 2003 -  

 

1. Powerful and Continuing Nationalism
2. Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights 
3. Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause
4. Supremacy of the Military
5. Rampant Sexism
6. Controlled Mass Media
7. Obsession with National Security
8. Religion and Government are Intertwined
9. Corporate Power is Protected
10. Labor Power is Suppressed
11. Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts
12. Obsession with Crime and Punishment
13. Rampant Cronyism and Corruption
14. Fraudulent Elections

Maybe you show learn your history before snidingly remarking on someone's intelligence. But let me guess, we're all just sheeple and you guys are the only one's with your eye's truly open? That about right?

 

 

23 minutes ago, GanDoonToonPet said:

 

Very low resolution understanding of the man.

 

When he was an officer in India, his best friend was an Indian officer. When they both went to the British officers' mess together, and everyone told his friend to get out, he replied 'If he goes, I go' and went to sit with his friend in the Indian officers' mess.

 

After he returned to the UK, he invited said same officer to spend christmas with him every year until he died. Does that sound like a racist to you?

 

Enoch Powell was a highly intelligent, educated and articulate man. He was well versed in history and the politics of the time, namely the wars in Israel-Palestine and India-Pakistan and the civil rights movement in America. It was these things which led to his concerns about immigration.

 

Now we are seeing the settler-colonialism of the UK (predominantly England) by Arab muslims who cluster in settlements / enclaves which, thanks to our electoral system, give them disproportionate electoral power. The power is effectively in the hands of the Imams, who instruct the men on how to vote, who in turn instruct their women and children; ironically, the patriarchy which we are supposed to despise. 🤔

 

Already we have local councillors elected on the 'Gaza ticket', who shout 'allahu akbar...free Palestine' as a war cry, a Pakistani mayor who cries 'I represent the people of Pakistan' to her constituents, people being prosecuted for burning the Koran and a law against 'Islamophobia' in the making. 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I'm_not_racist,_I_have_black_friends

On 6/23/2025 at 3:43 AM, Chomper Higgot said:

Direct consequence of the previous Tory Government losing control of the UK’s borders.

Here we go again, yet another Labour rhetoric devotee who appears to have deserted his country instead of supporting it blaming the Tories for everything that was originally created by Tony Blair’s Labour government who along with Germany’s Angela Muerkle invited these illegals to come here, Muerkle said Germany needed another million immigrants and millions came there, Blair invited them here because he was hoping that when they eventually got the vote it would be for Labour forever enhancing the lying, cheating thugs within the said party and it’s union barons.

So perhaps you should put your rhetoric stick along with your acid pen where the sun don’t shine until at least you get your facts correct.

And before you say it, no I do not support the Tories, but I do support the truth and it was Labour that instigated this travesty wherein our own people are homeless and living on the streets whilst illegals are given access to everything the taxpayer is denied.

The biggest invasion of Britain for 1000 years  is going on under our noses, helped by woke government , the RNLI  and woke police,,, while White British people are prosecuted for  protesting about it ...  During WW2   the beaches were mined and barbed wire and machine guns and the RN stopped the Invaders ,,  most of the invaders are Muslim single men of working and fighting age ...   over last 10 years UK population has  grown by 8m people   most are immigrants .. Its unsustainable and is leading to great social unrest ...

12 minutes ago, Jimjim1 said:

Here we go again, yet another Labour rhetoric devotee who appears to have deserted his country instead of supporting it blaming the Tories for everything that was originally created by Tony Blair’s Labour government who along with Germany’s Angela Muerkle invited these illegals to come here, Muerkle said Germany needed another million immigrants and millions came there, Blair invited them here because he was hoping that when they eventually got the vote it would be for Labour forever enhancing the lying, cheating thugs within the said party and it’s union barons.

So perhaps you should put your rhetoric stick along with your acid pen where the sun don’t shine until at least you get your facts correct.

And before you say it, no I do not support the Tories, but I do support the truth and it was Labour that instigated this travesty wherein our own people are homeless and living on the streets whilst illegals are given access to everything the taxpayer is denied.

And who was it that was so anti Immigration that they made it a manifesto commitment to get net migration to under 100,000. They banged on endlessly how they were going to get below 100,000 a year but they never got it below three quarters of a million. who was it, it wasn't the tories was it? The latest scandal is not deporting non UK prisoners when they are released which they are supposed to do.