| The split in the far-right vote 04:10 - Feb 18 with 11212 views | The_Romford_Blue |
Great to see. Albeit Lowe on Twitter is disturbing.
Anyone on here willing to admit they would vote Restore? Makes Farage and his lot look moderate in comparison some of that nazi sh** coming from Lowe. |  |
| |  |
| The split in the far-right vote on 11:05 - Feb 19 with 941 views | Herbivore |
| The split in the far-right vote on 10:50 - Feb 19 by Swansea_Blue |
I’d never heard of them and it’s hard to find out much information about them or who funds them. Their writers appear to be very young Turning Point UK types. I’ve only searched for a few of them, as life’s too short!, but none I’ve found seem to be writing for anywhere else. I only found one with a public profiles and he has a day job in Marks and Sparks:
https://www.linkedin.com/in/ed
It looks like Football League World for anti-Muslim, pro-white, studenty evangelical Tory types you find in the US. |
Indeed, it's not a remotely credible source but is being used to justify doubting the credibility of an article written by Hope Not Hate. I'd wager the individual doing so isn't really interested in weighing up the credibility of sources and is more concerned with finding reasons to discount stuff he doesn't like and to listen to stuff that resonates with him. We all do it to greater or lesser extent but this seems to be at the more extreme end of confirmation bias. |  |
| |
| The split in the far-right vote on 11:06 - Feb 19 with 943 views | chicoazul |
| The split in the far-right vote on 07:28 - Feb 18 by Swansea_Blue |
You realise ‘stop the boats’ is about stopping ‘that type’ (poor and of no use to them) of foreigner coming here? It’s not a humanitarian suggestion because they feel overwhelming concern for the wellbeing of refugees. Quite the opposite - they’re wanting to abandon refugees because they’re not white Brits. They have no practical, workable solution.
So no, “everyone” is not on board with Reform’s use of xenophobia and racism to win votes. I’m certainly not. |
Forgive me but isn’t abandoning them (not letting them in) a practical workable solution? |  |
| |
| The split in the far-right vote on 11:06 - Feb 19 with 935 views | Swansea_Blue |
| The split in the far-right vote on 10:56 - Feb 19 by leitrimblue |
Shhhhhhhiiiiiiiiiiiittttttttt  |
I suppose he’s strictly true there. Nazis were banned and the organisation disbanded. Nazi wannabes have to settle for being neo-Nazis and fascists these days. I bet that really galls them as well - they’d have loved to have pulled on a real SS uniform rather than prop department knock ups.
What a time to be alive eh? Can we call it fascism yet? |  |
| |
| The split in the far-right vote on 11:13 - Feb 19 with 893 views | Herbivore |
| The split in the far-right vote on 11:06 - Feb 19 by chicoazul |
Forgive me but isn’t abandoning them (not letting them in) a practical workable solution? |
Not really, no. Otherwise we'd be doing it already. We can't stop people entering the country and once here they can claim asylum. How do you propose we go about just not letting them in? | |
| |
| The split in the far-right vote on 11:18 - Feb 19 with 857 views | JackNorthStand |
| The split in the far-right vote on 11:13 - Feb 19 by Herbivore |
Not really, no. Otherwise we'd be doing it already. We can't stop people entering the country and once here they can claim asylum. How do you propose we go about just not letting them in? |
Remove on arrival, to locations outside of the UK. A plan which the Tories briefly had in place until Labour stopped it. |  | | |
| The split in the far-right vote on 11:23 - Feb 19 with 835 views | Blueschev |
| The split in the far-right vote on 11:18 - Feb 19 by JackNorthStand |
Remove on arrival, to locations outside of the UK. A plan which the Tories briefly had in place until Labour stopped it. |
No they didn't. The Tories pretended to try and implement the Rwanda plan knowing it was unlawful and would be overturned, in order to deflect responsibility from them and instead on to "lefty lawyers". |  | | |
| The split in the far-right vote on 11:35 - Feb 19 with 800 views | StokieBlue |
| The split in the far-right vote on 11:18 - Feb 19 by JackNorthStand |
Remove on arrival, to locations outside of the UK. A plan which the Tories briefly had in place until Labour stopped it. |
So you essentially want to stop people applying for asylum?
SB |  | | |
| The split in the far-right vote on 11:37 - Feb 19 with 789 views | Herbivore |
| The split in the far-right vote on 11:18 - Feb 19 by JackNorthStand |
Remove on arrival, to locations outside of the UK. A plan which the Tories briefly had in place until Labour stopped it. |
A ridiculous, unworkable, and likely illegal plan. So doesn't really meet the criteria of being practical or workable. | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| The split in the far-right vote on 11:38 - Feb 19 with 776 views | J2BLUE |
| The split in the far-right vote on 11:18 - Feb 19 by JackNorthStand |
Remove on arrival, to locations outside of the UK. A plan which the Tories briefly had in place until Labour stopped it. |
So fall back to nearer our shores and have an expanded coastguard who detain and remove them within a couple of days? |  |
| |
| The split in the far-right vote on 11:39 - Feb 19 with 768 views | Herbivore |
| The split in the far-right vote on 11:23 - Feb 19 by Blueschev |
No they didn't. The Tories pretended to try and implement the Rwanda plan knowing it was unlawful and would be overturned, in order to deflect responsibility from them and instead on to "lefty lawyers". |
Indeed. It was all for show, as were the entire "efforts" of the Tories to bring down migration. Labour have been far more effective in 18 months than the Tories were in years when it comes to immigration but it's still not enough for those who have the horn for Reform. | |
| |
| The split in the far-right vote on 11:43 - Feb 19 with 737 views | lowhouseblue |
| The split in the far-right vote on 11:38 - Feb 19 by J2BLUE |
So fall back to nearer our shores and have an expanded coastguard who detain and remove them within a couple of days? |
you then have the question of remove them to where - i can't see france saying yes.
if someone really wants to reduce the numbers, i suspect the only way now is to exclude asylum seekers from the human rights act and exclude boat arrivals from the modern slavery act*. we've pretty much established that nothing else makes much difference. i can't see the current parliament agreeing to either.
* this is an argument about how it might be done, not an argument that it should be done. |  |
| And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show |
| |
| The split in the far-right vote on 11:49 - Feb 19 with 716 views | DJR |
| The split in the far-right vote on 11:43 - Feb 19 by lowhouseblue |
you then have the question of remove them to where - i can't see france saying yes.
if someone really wants to reduce the numbers, i suspect the only way now is to exclude asylum seekers from the human rights act and exclude boat arrivals from the modern slavery act*. we've pretty much established that nothing else makes much difference. i can't see the current parliament agreeing to either.
* this is an argument about how it might be done, not an argument that it should be done. |
Or go the whole hog and withdraw from the Human Rights Convention and other international conventions such as the Refugee Convention and the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.
But of course, no current party would go down that route.  |  | | |
| The split in the far-right vote on 11:50 - Feb 19 with 714 views | J2BLUE |
| The split in the far-right vote on 11:43 - Feb 19 by lowhouseblue |
you then have the question of remove them to where - i can't see france saying yes.
if someone really wants to reduce the numbers, i suspect the only way now is to exclude asylum seekers from the human rights act and exclude boat arrivals from the modern slavery act*. we've pretty much established that nothing else makes much difference. i can't see the current parliament agreeing to either.
* this is an argument about how it might be done, not an argument that it should be done. |
I was just wondering, if he said yes, whether he would want us to intervene if they got into trouble or whether loss of life would be part of the deterrent.
That probably sounds like a loaded question but I am interested. I don't think everyone who wants less immigration is racist but we do need to have a bit of humanity. I suspect Reform would see it as a problem solved but it would be pretty shameful for the country. | |
| |
| The split in the far-right vote on 17:34 - Feb 19 with 585 views | chicoazul |
| The split in the far-right vote on 11:13 - Feb 19 by Herbivore |
Not really, no. Otherwise we'd be doing it already. We can't stop people entering the country and once here they can claim asylum. How do you propose we go about just not letting them in? |
Leave the ECHR and patrol the channel with 10 cutters, intercept the boats, disembark the passengers, return them to France. | |
| |
| The split in the far-right vote on 17:45 - Feb 19 with 561 views | Herbivore |
| The split in the far-right vote on 17:34 - Feb 19 by chicoazul |
Leave the ECHR and patrol the channel with 10 cutters, intercept the boats, disembark the passengers, return them to France. |
You can't return them to France without the agreement of France. Good luck patrolling the whole channel, how are you resourcing that exactly? And how are you safely executing the transfer of people from overloaded dinghies on to a larger vessel out in the open sea?
Leaving the ECHR puts us on an equal footing with the likes of Belarus and Russia, not the kind of thing that a serious country should even be entertaining. Do you have a practical and workable solution? Because at the minute this is just Reform pipedream stuff you're suggesting and these aren't serious or credible proposals. [Post edited 19 Feb 17:59]
| |
| |
| The split in the far-right vote on 19:24 - Feb 19 with 419 views | noggin |
| The split in the far-right vote on 17:34 - Feb 19 by chicoazul |
Leave the ECHR and patrol the channel with 10 cutters, intercept the boats, disembark the passengers, return them to France. |
France wouldn't agree to that though. But hey, you got a thumbing from Benters. [Post edited 19 Feb 19:25]
|  |
| |
| The split in the far-right vote on 19:27 - Feb 19 with 406 views | J2BLUE |
| The split in the far-right vote on 17:34 - Feb 19 by chicoazul |
Leave the ECHR and patrol the channel with 10 cutters, intercept the boats, disembark the passengers, return them to France. |
Imagine if the UK and France switched positions on the map and they said not our problem, the UK is a nice safe country so just stay there. People would be outraged. | |
| |
| The split in the far-right vote on 19:27 - Feb 19 with 402 views | vapour_trail |
| The split in the far-right vote on 17:34 - Feb 19 by chicoazul |
Leave the ECHR and patrol the channel with 10 cutters, intercept the boats, disembark the passengers, return them to France. |
Disembark the passengers?
Are you familiar with the Channel?
This is a new level of stupidity for these pages. |  |
| |
| The split in the far-right vote on 19:37 - Feb 19 with 373 views | noggin |
| The split in the far-right vote on 19:27 - Feb 19 by vapour_trail |
Disembark the passengers?
Are you familiar with the Channel?
This is a new level of stupidity for these pages. |
Chico and Benters will soon be calling for HMS Victory to be put to sea again. | |
| |
| The split in the far-right vote on 19:44 - Feb 19 with 358 views | Nthsuffolkblue |
| The split in the far-right vote on 11:18 - Feb 19 by JackNorthStand |
Remove on arrival, to locations outside of the UK. A plan which the Tories briefly had in place until Labour stopped it. |
Can you evidence how Labour prevented the Tory "plan"? I suspect you mean the Rwanda policy (which was far from removal on arrival anyway). How much did the Tories spend on that? How many people would it have removed even if it hadn't been illegal (which they knew in advance it was)? Why do you think they set the plan up instead of processing asylum claims which would have been far cheaper?
And while you're about it, can you say why you haven't responded to the question of why being anti-fascist is a bad thing? Being anti-fascist is being involved in left-wing political activism from the viewpoint of the far right, by the way. |  |
| |
| The split in the far-right vote on 19:54 - Feb 19 with 330 views | FrimleyBlue |
| The split in the far-right vote on 19:24 - Feb 19 by noggin |
France wouldn't agree to that though. But hey, you got a thumbing from Benters. [Post edited 19 Feb 19:25]
|
IF that happened in the future. Would it matter what france wanted? If theyve left the coast of france to come to uk and uk wants to take them back france might not want it but they allowed it. Wouldn't it then just mean that france then pushes back to and it reduces the number into france let alone into UK.
BTW I dont follow politics at all so not gonna pretend otherwise. Just curious abojt why it would matter what france wanted over what the UK would want. |  |
| |
| The split in the far-right vote on 19:59 - Feb 19 with 307 views | J2BLUE |
| The split in the far-right vote on 19:54 - Feb 19 by FrimleyBlue |
IF that happened in the future. Would it matter what france wanted? If theyve left the coast of france to come to uk and uk wants to take them back france might not want it but they allowed it. Wouldn't it then just mean that france then pushes back to and it reduces the number into france let alone into UK.
BTW I dont follow politics at all so not gonna pretend otherwise. Just curious abojt why it would matter what france wanted over what the UK would want. |
France is a key ally of the UK. Do we treat our friends badly for our own gain? France are not helping them on to the boats and giving them a push out to sea. It's far more complex. | |
| |
| The split in the far-right vote on 20:12 - Feb 19 with 284 views | FrimleyBlue |
| The split in the far-right vote on 19:59 - Feb 19 by J2BLUE |
France is a key ally of the UK. Do we treat our friends badly for our own gain? France are not helping them on to the boats and giving them a push out to sea. It's far more complex. |
Wouldn't a uk centre in france be plausible to process asylum applications. If then people tried to bypass that..then it would be right to return them
Just seems odd that thousands can get over and processed once they've made it here.
Appreciate the ally thing but arent we just being pushovers in this relationship? Im assuming brexit was the cause of it. | |
| |
| The split in the far-right vote on 20:18 - Feb 19 with 272 views | noggin |
| The split in the far-right vote on 20:12 - Feb 19 by FrimleyBlue |
Wouldn't a uk centre in france be plausible to process asylum applications. If then people tried to bypass that..then it would be right to return them
Just seems odd that thousands can get over and processed once they've made it here.
Appreciate the ally thing but arent we just being pushovers in this relationship? Im assuming brexit was the cause of it. |
Most of these asylum seekers will have crossed at least one "safe country" to reach France, so why doesn't France return them to Spain or Italy? This is so much more complex than The Mail will have you believe. The vast majority of asylum seekers don't attempt to reach the UK. | |
| |
| The split in the far-right vote on 20:19 - Feb 19 with 270 views | Swansea_Blue |
| The split in the far-right vote on 11:06 - Feb 19 by chicoazul |
Forgive me but isn’t abandoning them (not letting them in) a practical workable solution? |
How’s that working out so far? | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
