• 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)

Glenda's Legs said:
I just despair at the amount of disinformation that circulates. I’ve managed to get into yet another “Next Door” app conversation (on top of previous ones, including one I had at the weekend with a particular horrible individual who is the only person I have openly called a racist on that app and whom someone else said had previously been banned, had re registered under a different name but was a nasty piece of work as well as a racist , which made me a little worried) but anyway the comments earlier about education are important bit I don’t think anyone wants to listen. I continually counter against “well they pass through other safe counties before they come here” and “they are a danger to our women and children” and “I saw some of theme the other day and they stared and made me feel uncomfortable”. And that’s nothing compared to the poster I mentioned at the weekend.
We are in a bad place right now.

Edit : I probably should delete the Next Door app but I feel compelled to counter some of the utter rubbish that is posted, although I try to keep comments to the local area but sometimes get dragged into what posters from further afield say.
Click to expand...
Delete it for your mental health. You will not change any minds that are that far poisoned.
 
Rorschach said:
Delete it for your mental health. You will not change any minds that are that far poisoned.
Click to expand...
I know you are right.
But I am encouraged at least by the “likes” and “agrees” that I get that there are still decent people out there.
If we just ignore the vile comments and the misinformed comments, then who counters them?
 
Rorschach said:
Are you sure about that?
Click to expand...
That's pretty much the basis of the deal, yes. Those travelling from France to the UK can be sent back and asylum claims will not be considered by the UK. Instead, France must consider asylum status within France. In exchange, the UK has opened a legal route to claim asylum in the UK from France via an expression of interest request. To qualify a person must not have attempted to travel from France to the UK. How workable it is in practice is anyone's guess and it is just a pilot scheme in terms of numbers to start with
 
Not sure I am happy with approved asylum seekers being unable to bring (immediate) family to the UK (unless meeting certain income and other criteria). Feels like abandoning our responsibilites and pandering to Reform and Tories.
Haven't looked into it in detail , just going on the news items.
 
Silly McSilly Face said:
That's pretty much the basis of the deal, yes. Those travelling from France to the UK can be sent back and asylum claims will not be considered by the UK. Instead, France must consider asylum status within France. In exchange, the UK has opened a legal route to claim asylum in the UK from France via an expression of interest request. To qualify a person must not have attempted to travel from France to the UK. How workable it is in practice is anyone's guess and it is just a pilot scheme in terms of numbers to start with
Click to expand...
Yes, I have wondered how that would stand up to appeal.
 
Glenda's Legs said:
Not sure I am happy with approved asylum seekers being unable to bring (immediate) family to the UK (unless meeting certain income and other criteria). Feels like abandoning our responsibilites and pandering to Reform and Tories.
Haven't looked into it in detail , just going on the news items.
Click to expand...
As per Yvette Cooper, the average application for family reunions made by asylum seekers is within a month of being granted leave to remain, before they have secured a job or a place to live, meaning councils are then being faced with having to find emergency housing for families in order to prevent homelessness, with these cases now accounting for over 25% of all homelessness cases dealt with by some councils. The emergency accommodation pretty much always ends up as a hotel - so this is the only way Labour are going to meet their pledge to end asylum hotels by the end of the Parliament.

As a note, she also said we are out of kilter with other European countries in not imposing conditions on family reunions and again this is driving traffic to the UK.
 
Glenda's Legs said:
Yes, I have wondered how that would stand up to appeal.
Click to expand...
It would probably stand up to appeal as for example in the limited court proceedings around the Rwanda scheme the act of relocating an asylum seeker to a third country was not automatically seen as unlawful. It was whether the country in question was deemed safe that appeared to be the key question in law. But until its tested who really knows.
 
Silly McSilly Face said:
Human behaviour is all based on chemicals developed for caveman times. Fear, stress, anxiety, these are all inbuilt reactions for survival. Vision is one of our primary senses and a lot of reactions are inbuilt at a primeval level. Fear of snakes, spiders and rats/mice are typical examples of common involuntary fear processes due to the threats these things potentially represent.
Click to expand...

If you want to dive into this area, then you need to also address the exceptionally malevolent entities who have found ways to use technology to manipulate these senses and reactions. I'll challenge you directly on fear of snakes, spiders, rats/mice in a modern context; they are based on a lack of education and a fear of things which do not look like us. Most spiders are not harmful and certainly NOT human predators. The TRUTH is that perpetuated myths and ignorance are why there is still a prevalent 'stone age' attitude towards all the creature you name. One of our biggest predators remain US...combine ignorance and 'fear of those who do not look like us' and, well, you can do the rest of this living math...
 
Silly McSilly Face said:
Yeah so this is different. This is about people seeing their communities change rapidly around them. Being surrounded by people that don't speak their language on the bus. Seeing the local English shops close down and be replaced by Polski Skleps, Persian Charcoal and Halal butchers, this is about wanting to send your kid to a school where they'll fit in. None of that is about my or anyone else's reaction to meeting an individual person, it is about a feeling of community and shared culture and values and about how most people gravitate towards those similar/familiar to them. Our own PM set it out in his "island of strangers" speech.
Click to expand...

I don't know how old you are, but I am going to guess you were (at best) a child when the initial wave of Indian and Pakistani corner shops opened in the late 70s/early 80s. I remember the same 'fears' being expressed. I also remember people being absolutely delighted they could get a pint of milk or loaf of bread at 6pm on a Sunday night. I feel sure that most people are not over-saturated/suffering in 'Polski skelp' overtakes.
In order to promote 'community' and 'shared culture and values', I think there was to be some sign of warmth and welcoming. There certainly used to be, and it has also always been the case that facist agitators find ways to squeeze these situations and plant fears and anxieties. This in turn makes some communities feel less comfortable integrating and absorbing their surroundings fully. It is a massive problem IMO. Fundamentallly, I think people living in a country should absolutely adhere to it's ways and try to absorb what it is about, and I recognise that if people are immediately judged upon arrival, then their own fears and insecurities could make them less comfortable in choosing to engage outside their own communities. I think we're really speaking about majority realities versus minority truths. The majority of immigrants greatly enrich society and actively engage in it; are there 'bad 'uns'? Absolutely, sadly this will be the case in any walk of life. The question is whether society wants to believe that the majority of ordinary people share much more in common than they don't have.

We appear to be at a huge crossroads between divide & conquer tactics of fear and seperation working for the benefit of a few, or society finding it's way again and getting back on course.
 
thfcsteff said:
If you want to dive into this area, then you need to also address the exceptionally malevolent entities who have found ways to use technology to manipulate these senses and reactions. I'll challenge you directly on fear of snakes, spiders, rats/mice in a modern context; they are based on a lack of education and a fear of things which do not look like us. Most spiders are not harmful and certainly NOT human predators. The TRUTH is that perpetuated myths and ignorance are why there is still a prevalent 'stone age' attitude towards all the creature you name. One of our biggest predators remain US...combine ignorance and 'fear of those who do not look like us' and, well, you can do the rest of this living math...
Click to expand...
I wouldn't say we have any natural predators. Most humans do not kill other humans for predation.
 
thfcsteff said:
I don't know how old you are, but I am going to guess you were (at best) a child when the initial wave of Indian and Pakistani corner shops opened in the late 70s/early 80s. I remember the same 'fears' being expressed. I also remember people being absolutely delighted they could get a pint of milk or loaf of bread at 6pm on a Sunday night. I feel sure that most people are not over-saturated/suffering in 'Polski skelp' overtakes.
In order to promote 'community' and 'shared culture and values', I think there was to be some sign of warmth and welcoming. There certainly used to be, and it has also always been the case that facist agitators find ways to squeeze these situations and plant fears and anxieties. This in turn makes some communities feel less comfortable integrating and absorbing their surroundings fully. It is a massive problem IMO. Fundamentallly, I think people living in a country should absolutely adhere to it's ways and try to absorb what it is about, and I recognise that if people are immediately judged upon arrival, then their own fears and insecurities could make them less comfortable in choosing to engage outside their own communities. I think we're really speaking about majority realities versus minority truths. The majority of immigrants greatly enrich society and actively engage in it; are there 'bad 'uns'? Absolutely, sadly this will be the case in any walk of life. The question is whether society wants to believe that the majority of ordinary people share much more in common than they don't have.

We appear to be at a huge crossroads between divide & conquer tactics of fear and seperation working for the benefit of a few, or society finding it's way again and getting back on course.
Click to expand...
I was born in the 1980s, but not here. I grew up in South Yemen during the civil war.
 
Silly McSilly Face said:
I wouldn't say we have any natural predators. Most humans do not kill other humans for predation.
Click to expand...

I see.
Any carnivore of our size or larger is a potential predator depending on their state of hunger.
The definition of 'predator' is not fixed. In the context of 'eating' it is true that most humans do not kill other humans for food (canibals excepted).
Predator can also mean groups or individuals that plunder, pillage, rob or exploit others. In that sense we are our own worst predators.

I find it fascinating that you had no other comment. I don't like to assume why that might be, so I'll ask you why that is.
 
Glenda's Legs said:
I know you are right.
But I am encouraged at least by the “likes” and “agrees” that I get that there are still decent people out there.
If we just ignore the vile comments and the misinformed comments, then who counters them?
Click to expand...
There are certainly way more decent people out there than not. You would think it was the other way around, but small-minded racists are loud and often relentless In my experience, trying to reason with them is like telling a rock to change colour, but your point is well made. Confront or ignore is the choice. If you think it is worthwhile, then go at it but know that your audience is not the bigots you are addressing but those who are beginning to get swayed by their arguments. I'm sure you already know this.
 
thfcsteff said:
I see.
Any carnivore of our size or larger is a potential predator depending on their state of hunger.
The definition of 'predator' is not fixed. In the context of 'eating' it is true that most humans do not kill other humans for food (canibals excepted).
Predator can also mean groups or individuals that plunder, pillage, rob or exploit others. In that sense we are our own worst predators.

I find it fascinating that you had no other comment. I don't like to assume why that might be, so I'll ask you why that is.
Click to expand...
I mean I didn't really disagree with anything you said other than that bit, so I commented on that.
 
Silly McSilly Face said:
That's pretty much the basis of the deal, yes. Those travelling from France to the UK can be sent back and asylum claims will not be considered by the UK. Instead, France must consider asylum status within France. In exchange, the UK has opened a legal route to claim asylum in the UK from France via an expression of interest request. To qualify a person must not have attempted to travel from France to the UK. How workable it is in practice is anyone's guess and it is just a pilot scheme in terms of numbers to start with
Click to expand...
That will be challenged, I would think. The definition of who is inadmissible is just a side step, but that aside this just means that hypothetically speaking if it works and no poor soul braves the channel, let's say, then the UK will no longer accept any asylum seekers.
 
Rorschach said:
That will be challenged, I would think. The definition of who is inadmissible is just a side step, but that aside this just means that hypothetically speaking if it works and no poor soul braves the channel, let's say, then the UK will no longer accept any asylum seekers.
Click to expand...
I think that's the hope on Labour's part but I don't think it will work and if anything the measures Labour have put in place to tackle this issue are probably deterring families who are 1) less likely to present a threat risk and 2) more likely to be legitimate refugeees but are not having an impact on young male traffic - I've speculated that the declining numbers of children and women making the crossing may point to that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back