| 2 children drowned in the Channel today 16:08 - Sep 10 with 7760 views | noggin |
I bet they were fighting aged men in disguise. Stop the boats!, innocent people are perishing, while privileged white people fly flags as a show of hatred against them. |  |
| |  |
| 2 children drowned in the Channel today on 07:28 - Sep 11 with 1176 views | noggin |
| 2 children drowned in the Channel today on 19:58 - Sep 10 by djgooder |
Crikey, very pleasant.
Bigoted? All I’m suggesting is people pass security checks. That isn’t bigoted, it is sensible. |
The vast majority of UK citizens never have to pass a security check. How would you security clear someone arriving on a boat, with no papers and from a war torn 'undeveloped' country? | |
| |
| 2 children drowned in the Channel today on 07:48 - Sep 11 with 1111 views | djgooder |
| 2 children drowned in the Channel today on 07:28 - Sep 11 by noggin |
The vast majority of UK citizens never have to pass a security check. How would you security clear someone arriving on a boat, with no papers and from a war torn 'undeveloped' country? |
That’s exactly the point. How do you do it? ie it isn’t an acceptable entry point from any angle for entry to our country. From security, or from safety as seen with these recent young children crushed to death. |  | | |
| 2 children drowned in the Channel today on 07:59 - Sep 11 with 1091 views | noggin |
| 2 children drowned in the Channel today on 07:48 - Sep 11 by djgooder |
That’s exactly the point. How do you do it? ie it isn’t an acceptable entry point from any angle for entry to our country. From security, or from safety as seen with these recent young children crushed to death. |
So you're suggesting safe and legal routes for everyone? Very controversial. I don't see how that would make security clearing any easier though.
Unless of course, you're saying nobody should be able to flee war, persecution or famine, because they might be future criminals? | |
| |
| 2 children drowned in the Channel today on 08:11 - Sep 11 with 1059 views | djgooder |
| 2 children drowned in the Channel today on 07:59 - Sep 11 by noggin |
So you're suggesting safe and legal routes for everyone? Very controversial. I don't see how that would make security clearing any easier though.
Unless of course, you're saying nobody should be able to flee war, persecution or famine, because they might be future criminals? |
Well obviously nobody can predict the future.
But war and famine? How does crossing the channel
Align with that. If they are fleeing war and famine then there are many good options before the reach the channel. Hence, they are likely not fleeing war and famine. | | | |
| 2 children drowned in the Channel today on 08:15 - Sep 11 with 1046 views | noggin |
| 2 children drowned in the Channel today on 08:11 - Sep 11 by djgooder |
Well obviously nobody can predict the future.
But war and famine? How does crossing the channel
Align with that. If they are fleeing war and famine then there are many good options before the reach the channel. Hence, they are likely not fleeing war and famine. |
Well government statistics of granted applications would suggest otherwise. You appear to disagree? | |
| |
| 2 children drowned in the Channel today on 08:35 - Sep 11 with 1002 views | djgooder |
| 2 children drowned in the Channel today on 08:15 - Sep 11 by noggin |
Well government statistics of granted applications would suggest otherwise. You appear to disagree? |
Look. I don’t have all the answers obviously.
But channel crossings cannot be the answer, if do no reason apart for the tragedy we’ve seen yesterday of two children crushed to deaths | | | |
| 2 children drowned in the Channel today on 09:02 - Sep 11 with 953 views | Swansea_Blue |
| 2 children drowned in the Channel today on 08:35 - Sep 11 by djgooder |
Look. I don’t have all the answers obviously.
But channel crossings cannot be the answer, if do no reason apart for the tragedy we’ve seen yesterday of two children crushed to deaths |
Agreed, Channel crossings can’t be the answer. But neither is always stopping in the first safe country. For lots of well-publicised reasons, all countries need to work together to provide safe havens for people. |  |
| |
| 2 children drowned in the Channel today on 10:25 - Sep 11 with 813 views | ArnoldMoorhen |
| 2 children drowned in the Channel today on 16:41 - Sep 10 by Zx1988 |
I agree with all of this, except for the seemingly arbitrary decision as to whether someone will be granted asylum in France or the UK.
That element should be down to the needs and desires of the individual applicant, taking into account that there are probably a good number who already decide to stop and claim asylum in France.
I came across this poster outside a church in Gelsenkirchen at the weekend, which I feel is particularly fitting:
"Our cross has no hooks*. We want heart, not hate. You cannot choose your origins, but you can choose your homeland. We believe that falafal goes well with sauerkraut, and living together is better than living against oneanother. Our horizon is as wide as the sky over the Baltic beaches; rainbows included. Democracy means wanting the best for everyone and, as a result, sometimes having differing opinions. Racism is not an opinion. #WeAreMore"
*The German word for 'Swastika' literally translates as 'hooked cross'
If I, as a reasonably well-off and decently-educated individual can (broadly speaking) choose whether I want to live in the UK, France, Spain, Germany, or Burkina Faso, I believe that right should be afforded to everyone, not just those considered 'economically desirable'. [Post edited 10 Sep 16:44]
|
In an ideal world, we'd be free to choose...
Your open-heartedness is a long way from the middle ground of public opinion in the UK at the moment.
The Asylum Treaties and International Law that the UK has signed up to over the years was never intentioned to give freedom of movement. It was always intended to spell out humanitarian obligations to Sovereign States, and to provide a means for people's lives to be saved in the most horrendous and extreme circumstances.
Of course I understand that an individual may *prefer* to live in the UK if, for example, they can speak English or there is a community of people from their nation or region that is well-established in the UK.
But Asylum Law isn't about preference, it's about saving lives and preventing humanitarian disasters in extremis.
There is no prospect whatsoever in the UK at the moment of establishing the generous "everyone is welcome" policy that you favour. That would be supported by a very small proportion of the population.
Instead I would favour a re-establishing of the generations old consensus regarding Asylum and Refugee Status. That has been undermined by criminal people traffickers gaming the system, and by divisions with our former EU partners post-Brexit.
In the Trump era, the EU does need the UK, and the UK has a problem (people trafficking) that can only be solved with EU help. A sensible, mature, but urgent, shift is needed.
(And, on a fairly insubstantial point, I don't have the right to live in France, Spain or Germany. No idea about Burkina Faso!) |  | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| 2 children drowned in the Channel today on 11:44 - Sep 11 with 714 views | jayessess |
| 2 children drowned in the Channel today on 10:25 - Sep 11 by ArnoldMoorhen |
In an ideal world, we'd be free to choose...
Your open-heartedness is a long way from the middle ground of public opinion in the UK at the moment.
The Asylum Treaties and International Law that the UK has signed up to over the years was never intentioned to give freedom of movement. It was always intended to spell out humanitarian obligations to Sovereign States, and to provide a means for people's lives to be saved in the most horrendous and extreme circumstances.
Of course I understand that an individual may *prefer* to live in the UK if, for example, they can speak English or there is a community of people from their nation or region that is well-established in the UK.
But Asylum Law isn't about preference, it's about saving lives and preventing humanitarian disasters in extremis.
There is no prospect whatsoever in the UK at the moment of establishing the generous "everyone is welcome" policy that you favour. That would be supported by a very small proportion of the population.
Instead I would favour a re-establishing of the generations old consensus regarding Asylum and Refugee Status. That has been undermined by criminal people traffickers gaming the system, and by divisions with our former EU partners post-Brexit.
In the Trump era, the EU does need the UK, and the UK has a problem (people trafficking) that can only be solved with EU help. A sensible, mature, but urgent, shift is needed.
(And, on a fairly insubstantial point, I don't have the right to live in France, Spain or Germany. No idea about Burkina Faso!) |
Think the idea that the 21st Century refugee situation is wildly different to that imagined by the people drafting the 1951 UN Convention doesn't particularly work.
In 1951 they're principally thinking about the situation before the war and the failure of other states to facilitate Jewish people fleeing Germany. That was millions of people and those that did escape were not just dumped over the nearest border to 'safety' (and just as well they weren't). They made onwards journeys.
They're thinking about the millions of displaced people in camps across Europe after the war and the millions of people living under authoritarian regimes in Eastern Europe. Again, we're talking millions of people and again those people weren't just dumped over the nearest friendly border, they made onward journeys. 100,000s of people - Hungarians, Poles, Ukrainians, Lithuanians - settled in Britain.
The refugee convention is also explicit about granting refugees all sorts of social rights, so they can exist and have a life for however long they're in exile.
There isn't really much support for the idea that this was all set up for a different reality. What's different really is that in 1951 there was a widespread understanding that more should have been done to help people flee in the 1930s, sympathy for people displaced by the war and political sympathy for dissidents in the East.
Which is not so different to now really. Britain issued more than 400,000 visas to Ukrainians and Hong Kongers without widespread complaint, largely because there was an active effort on the part of politicians and media to paint their plight in a sympathetic light. You saw a brief flicker of something similar when Farage suggested we return people to Afghanistan and got at least some push back suggesting maybe sending people to be tortured and murdered by the Taliban might not be OK. [Post edited 11 Sep 12:11]
|  |
| |
| 2 children drowned in the Channel today on 12:21 - Sep 11 with 650 views | TRUE_BLUE123 |
| 2 children drowned in the Channel today on 19:32 - Sep 10 by djgooder |
The problem is that we are all in the same boat.
Mass immigration across the continent and one by one we are all starting to say stop.
This weekend there is going to be a mass rally in London. They are seen now in most European countries.
A solution is needed and just letting people in can’t be the permanent answer. |
I mean that Mass Rally in London is 100% for concerned citizens who want an intellectual debate on immigration as opposed to a bunch of blokes drinking tins and shouting outrageous things about foreign people whilst hero worshipping a man who is taking them all for a ride. |  |
| |
| ,2 children drowned in the Channel today on 12:54 - Sep 11 with 605 views | ArnoldMoorhen |
| 2 children drowned in the Channel today on 11:44 - Sep 11 by jayessess |
Think the idea that the 21st Century refugee situation is wildly different to that imagined by the people drafting the 1951 UN Convention doesn't particularly work.
In 1951 they're principally thinking about the situation before the war and the failure of other states to facilitate Jewish people fleeing Germany. That was millions of people and those that did escape were not just dumped over the nearest border to 'safety' (and just as well they weren't). They made onwards journeys.
They're thinking about the millions of displaced people in camps across Europe after the war and the millions of people living under authoritarian regimes in Eastern Europe. Again, we're talking millions of people and again those people weren't just dumped over the nearest friendly border, they made onward journeys. 100,000s of people - Hungarians, Poles, Ukrainians, Lithuanians - settled in Britain.
The refugee convention is also explicit about granting refugees all sorts of social rights, so they can exist and have a life for however long they're in exile.
There isn't really much support for the idea that this was all set up for a different reality. What's different really is that in 1951 there was a widespread understanding that more should have been done to help people flee in the 1930s, sympathy for people displaced by the war and political sympathy for dissidents in the East.
Which is not so different to now really. Britain issued more than 400,000 visas to Ukrainians and Hong Kongers without widespread complaint, largely because there was an active effort on the part of politicians and media to paint their plight in a sympathetic light. You saw a brief flicker of something similar when Farage suggested we return people to Afghanistan and got at least some push back suggesting maybe sending people to be tortured and murdered by the Taliban might not be OK. [Post edited 11 Sep 12:11]
|
Yes, the situation has changed so drastically.
WW2 displaced people walked, or maybe had donkey carts, across borders. Now there are international transit routes (plane, boat, lorry) which simply didn't exist then, and people can move across eight borders in a day.
And the heart of the issue here is the gaming of the system by criminal gangs. People trafficking either for cash upfront or for "indentured service", whether that be in kitchens, factories, on farms or in the sex trade.
Starmer is 100% right that we need to "smash the gangs", but by it's nature that work is covert and often painstaking and is operationally compromised if publicised for political leverage. | | | |
| 2 children drowned in the Channel today on 16:50 - Sep 11 with 440 views | Radlett_blue |
| 2 children drowned in the Channel today on 18:59 - Sep 10 by BlueBadger |
Have we received 'millions' of Ukrainians since opening up a safe and legal route for refugees from that (coincidentally, predominantly white) country? |
no, around 250,000 Ukrainians have come to Britain since the Russian conflict started. Some friends of mine took in a mother & her daughter for several months & then had issues with them feeling they could stay with them for ever. |  |
| |
| 2 children drowned in the Channel today on 16:54 - Sep 11 with 423 views | Clapham_Junction |
| 2 children drowned in the Channel today on 19:26 - Sep 10 by djgooder |
There are safe and legal routes.
Most people can get a holiday visa and fly here for a fraction of the costs they pay to people smuggling gangs. They can then apply for asylum when they arrive.
So why don’t they? Maybe they don’t want to declare their passports because we would see who they were and what their backgrounds are and therefore not they them in.
Does beg the question though why someone with young children would take this route. The absolute desperation must be horrendous. |
"Most people can get a holiday visa" is utter nonsense.
People coming from the countries in question would find it very difficult, if not impossible to get a holiday visa. My Chinese partner's mum has been denied a visitor visa in the past (because she's not working, which shouldn't be a surprise given she's over 70). |  | | |
| 2 children drowned in the Channel today on 17:02 - Sep 11 with 392 views | noggin |
| 2 children drowned in the Channel today on 19:26 - Sep 10 by djgooder |
There are safe and legal routes.
Most people can get a holiday visa and fly here for a fraction of the costs they pay to people smuggling gangs. They can then apply for asylum when they arrive.
So why don’t they? Maybe they don’t want to declare their passports because we would see who they were and what their backgrounds are and therefore not they them in.
Does beg the question though why someone with young children would take this route. The absolute desperation must be horrendous. |
"Most people can get a holiday visa and fly here"
Have you actually researched this, and would it make any difference if they arrived on a Jet2 flight?
Your last sentence is why they risk their lives crossing the channel. [Post edited 11 Sep 17:04]
| |
| |
| 2 children drowned in the Channel today on 17:26 - Sep 11 with 360 views | ArnoldMoorhen |
| 2 children drowned in the Channel today on 16:50 - Sep 11 by Radlett_blue |
no, around 250,000 Ukrainians have come to Britain since the Russian conflict started. Some friends of mine took in a mother & her daughter for several months & then had issues with them feeling they could stay with them for ever. |
For balance: Two and a half years in with our Ukrainian guests and no issues here.
I think a substantial proportion of people who offered rooms through the Homes for Ukraine scheme saw the initial six months contract period as being the limit of expectations. Understandably, many Ukrainians found it difficult when they were asked to move out. | | | |
| 2 children drowned in the Channel today on 17:52 - Sep 11 with 314 views | djgooder |
| 2 children drowned in the Channel today on 12:21 - Sep 11 by TRUE_BLUE123 |
I mean that Mass Rally in London is 100% for concerned citizens who want an intellectual debate on immigration as opposed to a bunch of blokes drinking tins and shouting outrageous things about foreign people whilst hero worshipping a man who is taking them all for a ride. |
It remains to see how it will go this weekend. I hope they are sensible but could just as easy turn into a riot. If they do that then they lose a chance to gain traction. Unfortunately traction in their argument produces an opportunity for farage which isn’t great.
I did see though as part of the parade Ant Middleton (ex SAS) is going to announce his candidacy for mayor of London. He does seem aligned with reform and would be the polar opposite of Kahn. Not sure how I feel about it, he clearly deserves respect for his service. Would be an interesting one to watch. | | | |
| 2 children drowned in the Channel today on 17:55 - Sep 11 with 308 views | djgooder |
| 2 children drowned in the Channel today on 16:54 - Sep 11 by Clapham_Junction |
"Most people can get a holiday visa" is utter nonsense.
People coming from the countries in question would find it very difficult, if not impossible to get a holiday visa. My Chinese partner's mum has been denied a visitor visa in the past (because she's not working, which shouldn't be a surprise given she's over 70). |
Fair point. Clearly some common sense needs to be applied to age and war torn countries. | | | |
| 2 children drowned in the Channel today on 18:17 - Sep 11 with 271 views | eireblue |
| 2 children drowned in the Channel today on 17:02 - Sep 11 by noggin |
"Most people can get a holiday visa and fly here"
Have you actually researched this, and would it make any difference if they arrived on a Jet2 flight?
Your last sentence is why they risk their lives crossing the channel. [Post edited 11 Sep 17:04]
|
Ditto my brother-in-law can’t get a tourist Visa. |  | | |
| 2 children drowned in the Channel today on 18:20 - Sep 11 with 268 views | ArnoldMoorhen |
| 2 children drowned in the Channel today on 17:52 - Sep 11 by djgooder |
It remains to see how it will go this weekend. I hope they are sensible but could just as easy turn into a riot. If they do that then they lose a chance to gain traction. Unfortunately traction in their argument produces an opportunity for farage which isn’t great.
I did see though as part of the parade Ant Middleton (ex SAS) is going to announce his candidacy for mayor of London. He does seem aligned with reform and would be the polar opposite of Kahn. Not sure how I feel about it, he clearly deserves respect for his service. Would be an interesting one to watch. |
Most members and ex-members of the SAS are sociopaths. They need to be to do what they do. And before the current TWTD fashionable retort comes back:
"Would you tell them that to their face?"
No, of course I fcking wouldn't!
I hope we don't go further down the American route of uncritical idol worship of those who have served in the military. Some of them are great people, but not all.
Being distinguished in active service doesn't necessarily correlate with being a good person, or a wise choice to lead a civilian organisation. | | | |
| 2 children drowned in the Channel today on 18:33 - Sep 11 with 233 views | djgooder |
| 2 children drowned in the Channel today on 18:20 - Sep 11 by ArnoldMoorhen |
Most members and ex-members of the SAS are sociopaths. They need to be to do what they do. And before the current TWTD fashionable retort comes back:
"Would you tell them that to their face?"
No, of course I fcking wouldn't!
I hope we don't go further down the American route of uncritical idol worship of those who have served in the military. Some of them are great people, but not all.
Being distinguished in active service doesn't necessarily correlate with being a good person, or a wise choice to lead a civilian organisation. |
SAS soldiers aren’t sociopaths—they’re highly trained professionals with exceptional emotional control, discipline, and teamwork. Their job demands empathy, trust, and psychological resilience, not emotional detachment or instability. Mistaking mental toughness for sociopathy is just lazy thinking.
It is not to say some might struggle after what they experience but that goes for may professions, not just the armed forces.
And I for one don’t idolise people lightly. However, I generally respect people who serve. Including police and firefighters etc.. and it isn’t me saying i idolise Ant Middleton, but I’d be an interested observer should he get the role. That partly comes from watching how he treated Kieran Dyer when he came out with his sexual abuse from his father story on TV. He certainly didn’t strike me as a sociopath. [Post edited 11 Sep 18:37]
| | | |
| 2 children drowned in the Channel today on 18:52 - Sep 11 with 161 views | J2BLUE |
| 2 children drowned in the Channel today on 18:20 - Sep 11 by ArnoldMoorhen |
Most members and ex-members of the SAS are sociopaths. They need to be to do what they do. And before the current TWTD fashionable retort comes back:
"Would you tell them that to their face?"
No, of course I fcking wouldn't!
I hope we don't go further down the American route of uncritical idol worship of those who have served in the military. Some of them are great people, but not all.
Being distinguished in active service doesn't necessarily correlate with being a good person, or a wise choice to lead a civilian organisation. |
Disrespectful nonsense.
Only a small handful can do it because only a small handful are capable of being that good. The very best of the very best in terms of discipline, training, bravery etc etc. |  |
| |
| 2 children drowned in the Channel today on 18:58 - Sep 11 with 145 views | mellowblue |
| 2 children drowned in the Channel today on 20:29 - Sep 10 by djgooder |
A very difficult question and has many options.
I have the luck of coming for a 1st world country and therefore safety means likely something very different to me than someone in a camp in France.
But, and I know you can’t answer this question, where did the people that n France come from? Let’s maybe take the example of war torn Syria a year or so back. It is safer than that. But also the countries they travelled through to get to a camp in France would have seen safer. To risk your child’s life on a channel crossing to get to family in the uk does seem a touch to far.
Of course there may be examples where they absolutely must come to the uk.
The economies of France; Germany etc are decent and standard of living likely better than ours. So why risk a channel crossing? |
Many examples I have heard is the wish to go to an English speaking country. Rather than the welfare state, which is the usual accusation. | | | |
| 2 children drowned in the Channel today on 19:20 - Sep 11 with 110 views | djgooder |
| 2 children drowned in the Channel today on 18:58 - Sep 11 by mellowblue |
Many examples I have heard is the wish to go to an English speaking country. Rather than the welfare state, which is the usual accusation. |
Yep. With the English language being the international language it is a draw.
Also, although it goes against many of the narratives we here anyone from a ex colony is likely to favour coming to us. | | | |
| 2 children drowned in the Channel today on 19:36 - Sep 11 with 76 views | noggin |
| 2 children drowned in the Channel today on 18:33 - Sep 11 by djgooder |
SAS soldiers aren’t sociopaths—they’re highly trained professionals with exceptional emotional control, discipline, and teamwork. Their job demands empathy, trust, and psychological resilience, not emotional detachment or instability. Mistaking mental toughness for sociopathy is just lazy thinking.
It is not to say some might struggle after what they experience but that goes for may professions, not just the armed forces.
And I for one don’t idolise people lightly. However, I generally respect people who serve. Including police and firefighters etc.. and it isn’t me saying i idolise Ant Middleton, but I’d be an interested observer should he get the role. That partly comes from watching how he treated Kieran Dyer when he came out with his sexual abuse from his father story on TV. He certainly didn’t strike me as a sociopath. [Post edited 11 Sep 18:37]
|
For me, he lost the respect he might have earned, when he used his service as a "look at me" to support his political views. By putting on a beret and spouting his political nonsense, he is bringing the name of the British Forces in to disrepute, imho. | |
| |
| 2 children drowned in the Channel today on 19:40 - Sep 11 with 62 views | djgooder |
| 2 children drowned in the Channel today on 19:36 - Sep 11 by noggin |
For me, he lost the respect he might have earned, when he used his service as a "look at me" to support his political views. By putting on a beret and spouting his political nonsense, he is bringing the name of the British Forces in to disrepute, imho. |
I haven’t seen that.
I only heard about him standing for mayor the other day. He was wearing civilian clothing in the brief video I saw.
Do you have a link? | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
