• 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)

Seedy Ron said:
According to this, between 2013 and 2018, the Australians turned back 33 vessels and 810 people. There have been 47000 attempted crossings of the Channel this year. The blockade's going to have to be pretty spectacular, in the busiest stretch of water on Earth. It'll also have to stretch from Northern France up to Belgium and Holland, because they'll just move their launch points of course.


Huh? I thought you were all about the people? His idea would remove the traffickers business instantly, and make sure no one drowns en route. I thought that's what you cared about?


Hmm, I fear the mask may be on the squiff a bit here. Brotherhood of man remember.


I want whoever is the government to be able to work with other governments, rather than just blame each other, to produce a proper solution to the problem. Which is what they're there for. Just a shame about the dearth of talent at Westminster.


TBH you sound like one of the Home Secretary's speeches (blame the lawyers, blame the French, blame the church), so you probably should reconsider your support.


Ha, they'll never get past the flotilla. Plus it'll be further once the water rises.
Click to expand...

My views are perfectly in line with millions of other working class people in this country who want to help those truly fleeing persecution but also do not want to see the country taken advantage of, which is clearly happening.

Putting on ferries would be unworkable and just cause even more of a pull. It is systematic of the overly Liberal approach that we take to everything aspect of life in this country. Being tough but caring and returning people to the shore they left from is the right and decent thing to do.

Those opposing it are doing so only because it causes the government problems and not caring about the human lives lost in the process.
 
richie_spur said:
The letter was reasonable and read as "let's work together to sort this out". In retaliation the French revoked an invitation to talks.

Seems a perfectly balanced and acceptable way to treat friends and neighbours, or maybe not...
Click to expand...

The French have always been like that though. Anyone stuck at a Port coming back through France when they were having one of their strikes will know what I'm talking about.
 
Lilbaz said:
Did watch a good documentary a while back about the rise of the far right in sweden though. They had a lot of somalian immigrants who started having gang wars. Instead of using guns, they could buy grenades from eastern europe for $10. This obviously got messy.
The government put an embargo on the swedish press from reporting on the violence as they thought it would make the far right stronger.
All a bit messed up.
Click to expand...


I've seen rumours of such things, but you just don't know anymore do you.
It becomes very tiresome wading through the rubbish to try and sort "the truth".
 
Rorschach said:
It read more like 'let's keep everyone in France' to be more accurate.
Click to expand...
It did, and if the French genuinely cared about saving lives then they would have agreed to it.

Macron accidentally said the quiet bit out loud today and made it clear as to how so many people are managing to launch the boats - the French don't care all that much about stopping them.
 
scaramanga said:
It did, and if the French genuinely cared about saving lives then they would have agreed to it.

Macron accidentally said the quiet bit out loud today and made it clear as to how so many people are managing to launch the boats - the French don't care all that much about stopping them.
Click to expand...
If someone wants to claim asylum in the UK they are perfectly entitled to. There is nothing illegal about that.
 
Danishfurniturelover said:
My views are perfectly in line with millions of other working class people in this country who want to help those truly fleeing persecution but also do not want to see the country taken advantage of, which is clearly happening.

Putting on ferries would be unworkable and just cause even more of a pull. It is systematic of the overly Liberal approach that we take to everything aspect of life in this country. Being tough but caring and returning people to the shore they left from is the right and decent thing to do.

Those opposing it are doing so only because it causes the government problems and not caring about the human lives lost in the process.
Click to expand...
Taken advantage of?

Ecaping to the UK for refuge and combining it with the possibility to create the best life, and therefore societal contribution, is "taking advantage"?
What next, the disabled are taking advantage? Coming out the womb, not being "fully functional worker drones".
 
Gilzeantoscore said:
No, clams who dress as police officers and then go onto an island and shoot about fifty kids attending a left wing conference. They think that those types are extreme right wing.
Click to expand...
What do they call people who don't know the difference between Sweden and Norway?
 
LutonSpurs said:
You are talking about international law here. Don't be a dingdong. We have closed the legal routes to entry.
Click to expand...
We should certainly have more of a presence for applications on countries people are fleeing - that side should be easier.

That's not France though.
 
scaramanga said:
We should certainly have more of a presence for applications on countries people are fleeing - that side should be easier.

That's not France though.
Click to expand...

Again they have a choice by international law to pick us. So your point about legal means was wrong. They have no legal means to enter. You chat nonsense.
 
LutonSpurs said:
Again they have a choice by international law to pick us. So your point about legal means was wrong. They have no legal means to enter. You chat nonsense.
Click to expand...
I'm saying it should be easier to enter by legal means and, of course, they have every right to pick us. We need more presence in and near the countries people are fleeing and should accept as many applications as we can.

That doesn't mean we should accept illegal entry as a means though. Especially when those doing so are fleeing from France.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back