• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Politics, politics, politics (so long and thanks for all the fish)

scaramanga said:
Desperation and being selective are fairly exclusive don't you think?

If a person's situation is that bad that they qualify for asylum, then the difference between France and the UK should be in the margins.
Click to expand...

Again they have the choice. And knowing some English and knowing that their is more opportunity for a better future is a legitimate reason to take the risk to get here. And overall migration has a net benefit to the economy. It's a win for all objective folk.
 
LutonSpurs said:
Again they have the choice. And knowing some English and knowing that their is more opportunity for a better future is a legitimate reason to take the risk to get here. And overall migration has a net benefit to the economy. It's a win for all objective folk.
Click to expand...
I have mentioned before that I think people should be free to move wherever and whenever they want.

But all the time we have a system whereby the government gives my money to other people, they should be applying for asylum from France where they are safe.
 
LutonSpurs said:
I hope they make it across safely. If their claim for asylum is legitimate I hope they end up being valuable contributors to our wonderful society. Amen.
Click to expand...

That would be a wonderful outcome.

Unfortunately, the reports of large numbers of them being armed on arrival suggests it's likely to be a long and risky road in many cases.
 
Last edited:
scaramanga said:
I have mentioned before that I think people should be free to move wherever and whenever they want.

But all the time we have a system whereby the government gives my money to other people, they should be applying for asylum from France where they are safe.
Click to expand...

£5 a week per asylum seeker. As a tax payer that's one of the smallest issues for you to be worked up about but hey...
 
LutonSpurs said:
£5 a week per asylum seeker. As a tax payer that's one of the smallest issues for you to be worked up about but hey...
Click to expand...

Wow if i was running one of those B&Bs and was only getting a fiver a day for my room and breakfast i would have to seriously think about my business plan.

Funny thing is 12 years ago i worked with a guy who was going through financial problems and he and his wife despite working were made homeless and went into emergency accommodation in chichester and he told me the were a lot of asylum seekers there.

He preferred them to the drunks but was envious how they got all there perscriptions free and were also given mobile phones with credit on.
 
LutonSpurs said:
Reports? I've not seen any verified reports around this.
Click to expand...

I heard it last week (not for the first time). It was mentioned as part of a report that I think was on the BBC, stating that it's become such a regular issue that border staff are having to wear body armour.
 
LutonSpurs said:
Again they have the choice. And knowing some English and knowing that their is more opportunity for a better future is a legitimate reason to take the risk to get here.
Click to expand...

That would make them economic migrants, which the country does need but they should fit the same criteria as everyone else when applying for a visa. I can not just rock up in say Malaysia. I would need a visa and a job offer.

If they can speak English or some English then the is no need for charities or the government to offer english speaking lessons then is the?

As even farage has said we should be taking genuine refugees. But you go direct to war zones or aid camps.

That bbc clip summed it all up, a boat of young men. I dare say our asylum system is actually sexist and ageist because it discriminates against people who in the groups who are not physically fit enough to get here. That brings shame on us as a country that we are only prepared to offer aslyum to young men.

Serious question, dont you care about the elderly or women or keeping families together.
 
scaramanga said:
Picking winners is not a literal term to describe them as the best. It's quite the opposite.

"Picking winners" is a derogatory term describing public procurement that continually fails to keep up with a standard level of what the markets can offer, let alone an excellent one.

For every story of someone doing well on the NHS, there's one like mine. Before I had private healthcare I had to use an NHS hospital. I was in a room with 5 other people. There was a shared toilet between fudge known how many people. Food was only available at set meal times and was made of something I wouldn't even feed an animal. There was no alcohol and nothing whatsoever to do for three days.

Spending time in the "care" of the NHS might suit people who will happily holiday in those backpacker places but it's simply not how to treat human beings.
Click to expand...

First of all, I am keenly aware of the varnish you apply to your sentences (and sentiments), so no need to engage in tedious, patronizing explanations.

Secondly, my Mother is hardly someone who would "happily holiday in one of those backpacker places" and as is obvious, you have never been to the Royal Marsden (luckily I might add - I will do you the service of assuming you know of what 'luck' I speak.
Two cancers survived on the NHS in a 24 year span my friend; your snobbery cannot top that.

Finally, and perhaps most significantly, you have apparently lost sight of the fact that a hospital's main function is to supply healthcare, not Michelin star meals or top shelf alcohol. The irony is that if more money was spent on the NHS, perhaps the (lack of) facilities you describe/lower standards of them could be addressed. Instead, the Tories continue to slowly bleed it to death.

Did your ailment/health issue get resolved?

I did not -BTW- know you were such an ardent acolyte of PG Wodehouse...
 
Last edited:
thfcsteff said:
Who are you referring to (to be clear this is a straight question as I obviously know it is not me; I am genuinely interested).
Click to expand...

I noticed what seemed an uncanny similarity in views and posting/debating style between Mr. Lights and another regular poster in these threads. I'll keep it under my hat, but you are right that it isn't you...!
 
Last edited:
scaramanga said:
I don't think they should be.

I'm perfectly happy for the UK to have a robust asylum system for anyone who needs to come here from somewhere they're in danger.

What isn't acceptable is taking every other country's cast offs like this. They're safe in France, there's no need to head here. It's like being offered a council house in Rotherham and insisting on one in Mayfair.
Click to expand...

Right.
Clubbing together in a dinghy and sailing across open seas is definitely like being offered a council house in Rotherham and insisting on one in Mayfair.
Jesus...
 
Parklaner81 said:
I heard it last week (not for the first time). It was mentioned as part of a report that I think was on the BBC, stating that it's become such a regular issue that border staff are having to wear body armour.
Click to expand...

I've had a quick search and can't see much on this.

Danishfurniturelover said:
Serious question, dont you care about the elderly or women or keeping families together.
Click to expand...

Ermm yes. But asylum is asylum right.
 
LutonSpurs said:
I've had a quick search and can't see much on this.
Click to expand...

I've done the same and nor can I (although there are a few quotes from security staff, reproduced in sources such as the express and the mail that are fairly easy to find, that support the assertion).

Of course, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, and I can absolutely assure you that I saw this on a tv news report last week. I'm almost certain it was the BBC, as that's the only news channel I have on at home 95% of the time.
 
Last edited:
Parklaner81 said:
I've done the same and nor can I (although there are a few quotes from security staff, reproduced in sources such as the express and the mail that are fairly easy to find, that support the assertion).

Of course, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, and I can absolutely assure you that I saw this on a tv news report last week. I'm almost certain it was the BBC, as that's the only news channel I have on at home 95% of the time.
Click to expand...

I do not doubt you saw what you saw, however it is not a report I have seen and I do read a fair bit on this stuff and in reality it really doesn't make any sense for them to be tooled up. They are not going to invade and conquer Dover with a rusty pen knife.
 
LutonSpurs said:
I do not doubt you saw what you saw, however it is not a report I have seen and I do read a fair bit on this stuff and in reality it really doesn't make any sense for them to be tooled up. They are not going to invade and conquer Dover with a rusty pen knife.
Click to expand...

I think the fact that body armour has made its way into the situation/discussion suggests we're probably talking about a little bit more than pen knives here.

You seem quite determined to deny or downplay the issue, which I find a little bit strange considering your earlier, laudable sentiment regarding these people going on to become valuable members of our society. Quite apart from the immediate, direct risk posed to border staff, such a problem were it to actually exist, would surely be a significant obstacle to this vision. One that is surely better confronted than ignored? I posted an article in the coronavirus thread that is quite pertinent to this conversation.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back