FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > Clapham attacks
Clapham attacks
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
"What the actual fuck is going on here?? This guy failed 2 asylum applications, was convicted of a sex crime, changed his religion to Christianity and claimed his life would be in danger if he returned to Afghanistan and was granted asylum on the third attempt. Tell me again that people don't know how to play our system. " Who’s said that people don’t know how to play the system? We need a better system. | |||
"What the actual fuck is going on here?? This guy failed 2 asylum applications, was convicted of a sex crime, changed his religion to Christianity and claimed his life would be in danger if he returned to Afghanistan and was granted asylum on the third attempt. Tell me again that people don't know how to play our system. Who’s said that people don’t know how to play the system? We need a better system. " A system where we deport after the first rejection would suffice. Maybe then he wouldn't have been able to commit crime in this country. | |||
"What the actual fuck is going on here?? This guy failed 2 asylum applications, was convicted of a sex crime, changed his religion to Christianity and claimed his life would be in danger if he returned to Afghanistan and was granted asylum on the third attempt. Tell me again that people don't know how to play our system. Who’s said that people don’t know how to play the system? We need a better system. A system where we deport after the first rejection would suffice. Maybe then he wouldn't have been able to commit crime in this country. " If the checks done were correct, then deportation after a failed attempt would be suitable - there should be some sort of right to appeal (there is in every other walk of life), but that appeal could be fast-tracked or even undertaken after removal (And if the appeal is ‘won’ the citizen could return at home office expense). | |||
| |||
| |||
"What the actual fuck is going on here?? This guy failed 2 asylum applications, was convicted of a sex crime, changed his religion to Christianity and claimed his life would be in danger if he returned to Afghanistan and was granted asylum on the third attempt. Tell me again that people don't know how to play our system. Who’s said that people don’t know how to play the system? We need a better system. A system where we deport after the first rejection would suffice. Maybe then he wouldn't have been able to commit crime in this country. If the checks done were correct, then deportation after a failed attempt would be suitable - there should be some sort of right to appeal (there is in every other walk of life), but that appeal could be fast-tracked or even undertaken after removal (And if the appeal is ‘won’ the citizen could return at home office expense)." If we had a robust enough test then there wouldn't be any need for appeals. If we must have appeals then they can be done after removal, from elsewhere. | |||
"should we judge Our taxes were used to murder innocent people in Afghanistan who had previously been no harm to us, the state tried to cover it up and nobody has gone to prison https://casebook.icrc.org/case-study/united-kingdom-unlawful-killings-afghanistan#:~:text=In%20the%20summer%20of%202022,unarmed%20men%20under%20dubious%20circumstances." I can't judge an absolute fucking cretin because Tony Blair decided to send our troops to Afghanistan? | |||
| |||
| |||
"What the actual fuck is going on here?? This guy failed 2 asylum applications, was convicted of a sex crime, changed his religion to Christianity and claimed his life would be in danger if he returned to Afghanistan and was granted asylum on the third attempt. Tell me again that people don't know how to play our system. Who’s said that people don’t know how to play the system? We need a better system. A system where we deport after the first rejection would suffice. Maybe then he wouldn't have been able to commit crime in this country. If the checks done were correct, then deportation after a failed attempt would be suitable - there should be some sort of right to appeal (there is in every other walk of life), but that appeal could be fast-tracked or even undertaken after removal (And if the appeal is ‘won’ the citizen could return at home office expense). If we had a robust enough test then there wouldn't be any need for appeals. If we must have appeals then they can be done after removal, from elsewhere. " If a human is involved in the process, then mistakes can be made, bias can exists and so on. There’ll always be a requirement for appeals, as with anything in life from Parking tickets to sentencing. | |||
"An adequate asylum system would have a sort of holding system where the arrivals could live temporarily while their case goes through, plus an appeal (max 1 appeal). It would be a secure and safe area, where needs were met and safe living standards maintained. If asylum was granted then they’d move into the country legally, and if asylum failed, they’d remain on site until deportation was complete. This requires funding, good administration and government will. As far as I can tell, all three are missing. " I don't disagree, except for the appeal, I think the system should be so simple to administer that the right to appeal is not an option. The problem with the accommodation, is there is no facility that could house them, and if we did build a town like facility I'm confident we would have protestors likening them to nazi camps | |||
"should we judge Our taxes were used to murder innocent people in Afghanistan who had previously been no harm to us, the state tried to cover it up and nobody has gone to prison https://casebook.icrc.org/case-study/united-kingdom-unlawful-killings-afghanistan#:~:text=In%20the%20summer%20of%202022,unarmed%20men%20under%20dubious%20circumstances." Members of the British army have been doing horrendous things for hundreds of years, I don’t disagree - but it’s apples and oranges in this case. Both are horrendous, I accept. | |||
"What the actual fuck is going on here?? This guy failed 2 asylum applications, was convicted of a sex crime, changed his religion to Christianity and claimed his life would be in danger if he returned to Afghanistan and was granted asylum on the third attempt. Tell me again that people don't know how to play our system. Who’s said that people don’t know how to play the system? We need a better system. A system where we deport after the first rejection would suffice. Maybe then he wouldn't have been able to commit crime in this country. If the checks done were correct, then deportation after a failed attempt would be suitable - there should be some sort of right to appeal (there is in every other walk of life), but that appeal could be fast-tracked or even undertaken after removal (And if the appeal is ‘won’ the citizen could return at home office expense). If we had a robust enough test then there wouldn't be any need for appeals. If we must have appeals then they can be done after removal, from elsewhere. If a human is involved in the process, then mistakes can be made, bias can exists and so on. There’ll always be a requirement for appeals, as with anything in life from Parking tickets to sentencing." Do you think we'd make more mistakes than we do now? As I said, if there must be a right of appeal, it can be done after removal. Just as criminals appeal from their cell. | |||
"An adequate asylum system would have a sort of holding system where the arrivals could live temporarily while their case goes through, plus an appeal (max 1 appeal). It would be a secure and safe area, where needs were met and safe living standards maintained. If asylum was granted then they’d move into the country legally, and if asylum failed, they’d remain on site until deportation was complete. This requires funding, good administration and government will. As far as I can tell, all three are missing. I don't disagree, except for the appeal, I think the system should be so simple to administer that the right to appeal is not an option. The problem with the accommodation, is there is no facility that could house them, and if we did build a town like facility I'm confident we would have protestors likening them to nazi camps" A right to appeal absolutely must exist in all walks of life. | |||
"What the actual fuck is going on here?? This guy failed 2 asylum applications, was convicted of a sex crime, changed his religion to Christianity and claimed his life would be in danger if he returned to Afghanistan and was granted asylum on the third attempt. Tell me again that people don't know how to play our system. Who’s said that people don’t know how to play the system? We need a better system. A system where we deport after the first rejection would suffice. Maybe then he wouldn't have been able to commit crime in this country. If the checks done were correct, then deportation after a failed attempt would be suitable - there should be some sort of right to appeal (there is in every other walk of life), but that appeal could be fast-tracked or even undertaken after removal (And if the appeal is ‘won’ the citizen could return at home office expense). If we had a robust enough test then there wouldn't be any need for appeals. If we must have appeals then they can be done after removal, from elsewhere. If a human is involved in the process, then mistakes can be made, bias can exists and so on. There’ll always be a requirement for appeals, as with anything in life from Parking tickets to sentencing. Do you think we'd make more mistakes than we do now? As I said, if there must be a right of appeal, it can be done after removal. Just as criminals appeal from their cell. " That’s a fair solution, and as I say, if a mistake was made and deportation was found to be wrong, then we’d pay for the asylum seeker to return to the UK as it was our mistake. | |||
"An adequate asylum system would have a sort of holding system where the arrivals could live temporarily while their case goes through, plus an appeal (max 1 appeal). It would be a secure and safe area, where needs were met and safe living standards maintained. If asylum was granted then they’d move into the country legally, and if asylum failed, they’d remain on site until deportation was complete. This requires funding, good administration and government will. As far as I can tell, all three are missing. I don't disagree, except for the appeal, I think the system should be so simple to administer that the right to appeal is not an option. The problem with the accommodation, is there is no facility that could house them, and if we did build a town like facility I'm confident we would have protestors likening them to nazi camps" There are plenty of facilities, the problem is 'good people' argue they aren't good enough. I guarantee they're better than a tent in calais. | |||
"What the actual fuck is going on here?? This guy failed 2 asylum applications, was convicted of a sex crime, changed his religion to Christianity and claimed his life would be in danger if he returned to Afghanistan and was granted asylum on the third attempt. Tell me again that people don't know how to play our system. Who’s said that people don’t know how to play the system? We need a better system. A system where we deport after the first rejection would suffice. Maybe then he wouldn't have been able to commit crime in this country. If the checks done were correct, then deportation after a failed attempt would be suitable - there should be some sort of right to appeal (there is in every other walk of life), but that appeal could be fast-tracked or even undertaken after removal (And if the appeal is ‘won’ the citizen could return at home office expense). If we had a robust enough test then there wouldn't be any need for appeals. If we must have appeals then they can be done after removal, from elsewhere. If a human is involved in the process, then mistakes can be made, bias can exists and so on. There’ll always be a requirement for appeals, as with anything in life from Parking tickets to sentencing. Do you think we'd make more mistakes than we do now? As I said, if there must be a right of appeal, it can be done after removal. Just as criminals appeal from their cell. That’s a fair solution, and as I say, if a mistake was made and deportation was found to be wrong, then we’d pay for the asylum seeker to return to the UK as it was our mistake." A £500 plane ticket is much much cheaper than keeping them here for years until appeal is heard. | |||
"What the actual fuck is going on here?? This guy failed 2 asylum applications, was convicted of a sex crime, changed his religion to Christianity and claimed his life would be in danger if he returned to Afghanistan and was granted asylum on the third attempt. Tell me again that people don't know how to play our system. Who’s said that people don’t know how to play the system? We need a better system. A system where we deport after the first rejection would suffice. Maybe then he wouldn't have been able to commit crime in this country. If the checks done were correct, then deportation after a failed attempt would be suitable - there should be some sort of right to appeal (there is in every other walk of life), but that appeal could be fast-tracked or even undertaken after removal (And if the appeal is ‘won’ the citizen could return at home office expense). If we had a robust enough test then there wouldn't be any need for appeals. If we must have appeals then they can be done after removal, from elsewhere. If a human is involved in the process, then mistakes can be made, bias can exists and so on. There’ll always be a requirement for appeals, as with anything in life from Parking tickets to sentencing. Do you think we'd make more mistakes than we do now? As I said, if there must be a right of appeal, it can be done after removal. Just as criminals appeal from their cell. That’s a fair solution, and as I say, if a mistake was made and deportation was found to be wrong, then we’d pay for the asylum seeker to return to the UK as it was our mistake. A £500 plane ticket is much much cheaper than keeping them here for years until appeal is heard. " Agreed - though obviously nobody could be sent back to a warzone or suchlike. And an adequate system wouldn’t take years to hear an appeal . | |||
| |||
"What the actual fuck is going on here?? This guy failed 2 asylum applications, was convicted of a sex crime, changed his religion to Christianity and claimed his life would be in danger if he returned to Afghanistan and was granted asylum on the third attempt. Tell me again that people don't know how to play our system. Who’s said that people don’t know how to play the system? We need a better system. A system where we deport after the first rejection would suffice. Maybe then he wouldn't have been able to commit crime in this country. If the checks done were correct, then deportation after a failed attempt would be suitable - there should be some sort of right to appeal (there is in every other walk of life), but that appeal could be fast-tracked or even undertaken after removal (And if the appeal is ‘won’ the citizen could return at home office expense). If we had a robust enough test then there wouldn't be any need for appeals. If we must have appeals then they can be done after removal, from elsewhere. If a human is involved in the process, then mistakes can be made, bias can exists and so on. There’ll always be a requirement for appeals, as with anything in life from Parking tickets to sentencing. Do you think we'd make more mistakes than we do now? As I said, if there must be a right of appeal, it can be done after removal. Just as criminals appeal from their cell. That’s a fair solution, and as I say, if a mistake was made and deportation was found to be wrong, then we’d pay for the asylum seeker to return to the UK as it was our mistake. A £500 plane ticket is much much cheaper than keeping them here for years until appeal is heard. Agreed - though obviously nobody could be sent back to a warzone or suchlike. And an adequate system wouldn’t take years to hear an appeal ." Like Cyprus? There are more than 100 active warzones today. That means over half of the world is currently in a war. | |||
"Cultural enrichment. Nothing can be done. It’s just life in modern Britain. We need random immigrants to make up the numbers. Expect a lot more of it." Think I could seek asylum elsewhere? | |||
"Cultural enrichment. Nothing can be done. It’s just life in modern Britain. We need random immigrants to make up the numbers. Expect a lot more of it." Well things can be done, it’s entirely possible to have an adequate asylum system, a healthy level of immigration and real the rewards from it - this happens in a great many countries. What it needs is adequate management and support. Two things that our present government are particular bad at. | |||
"What the actual fuck is going on here?? This guy failed 2 asylum applications, was convicted of a sex crime, changed his religion to Christianity and claimed his life would be in danger if he returned to Afghanistan and was granted asylum on the third attempt. Tell me again that people don't know how to play our system. Who’s said that people don’t know how to play the system? We need a better system. A system where we deport after the first rejection would suffice. Maybe then he wouldn't have been able to commit crime in this country. If the checks done were correct, then deportation after a failed attempt would be suitable - there should be some sort of right to appeal (there is in every other walk of life), but that appeal could be fast-tracked or even undertaken after removal (And if the appeal is ‘won’ the citizen could return at home office expense). If we had a robust enough test then there wouldn't be any need for appeals. If we must have appeals then they can be done after removal, from elsewhere. If a human is involved in the process, then mistakes can be made, bias can exists and so on. There’ll always be a requirement for appeals, as with anything in life from Parking tickets to sentencing. Do you think we'd make more mistakes than we do now? As I said, if there must be a right of appeal, it can be done after removal. Just as criminals appeal from their cell. That’s a fair solution, and as I say, if a mistake was made and deportation was found to be wrong, then we’d pay for the asylum seeker to return to the UK as it was our mistake. A £500 plane ticket is much much cheaper than keeping them here for years until appeal is heard. Agreed - though obviously nobody could be sent back to a warzone or suchlike. And an adequate system wouldn’t take years to hear an appeal . Like Cyprus? There are more than 100 active warzones today. That means over half of the world is currently in a war." And with adequate resources, that’s not a problem. If it’s safe to deport pending appeal, do so. If not, we have a safe place to hold the individual until the appeal is heard. | |||
"Cultural enrichment. Nothing can be done. It’s just life in modern Britain. We need random immigrants to make up the numbers. Expect a lot more of it. Well things can be done, it’s entirely possible to have an adequate asylum system, a healthy level of immigration and real the rewards from it - this happens in a great many countries. What it needs is adequate management and support. Two things that our present government are particular bad at." Nothing will be done. If you think things will improve under Labour you are kidding yourself. It will just be a government full of people who don’t even know why we have borders. It will just be globalism from a slightly different perspective. The dominant culture of the administrative state today is inaction. All that ordinary people can do is stay vigilant and hope that they don’t attract the attention of the next nutjob with a knife and a grudge. And if they do, well bad luck and expect some headlines in the press for a couple of days as an obituary. | |||
"What the actual fuck is going on here?? This guy failed 2 asylum applications, was convicted of a sex crime, changed his religion to Christianity and claimed his life would be in danger if he returned to Afghanistan and was granted asylum on the third attempt. Tell me again that people don't know how to play our system. Who’s said that people don’t know how to play the system? We need a better system. A system where we deport after the first rejection would suffice. Maybe then he wouldn't have been able to commit crime in this country. If the checks done were correct, then deportation after a failed attempt would be suitable - there should be some sort of right to appeal (there is in every other walk of life), but that appeal could be fast-tracked or even undertaken after removal (And if the appeal is ‘won’ the citizen could return at home office expense). If we had a robust enough test then there wouldn't be any need for appeals. If we must have appeals then they can be done after removal, from elsewhere. If a human is involved in the process, then mistakes can be made, bias can exists and so on. There’ll always be a requirement for appeals, as with anything in life from Parking tickets to sentencing. Do you think we'd make more mistakes than we do now? As I said, if there must be a right of appeal, it can be done after removal. Just as criminals appeal from their cell. That’s a fair solution, and as I say, if a mistake was made and deportation was found to be wrong, then we’d pay for the asylum seeker to return to the UK as it was our mistake. A £500 plane ticket is much much cheaper than keeping them here for years until appeal is heard. Agreed - though obviously nobody could be sent back to a warzone or suchlike. And an adequate system wouldn’t take years to hear an appeal . Like Cyprus? There are more than 100 active warzones today. That means over half of the world is currently in a war. And with adequate resources, that’s not a problem. If it’s safe to deport pending appeal, do so. If not, we have a safe place to hold the individual until the appeal is heard." Anywhere in this country would be safe in comparison. We've had countless cases of 'you can't house them there'. That needs changing. | |||
"Cultural enrichment. Nothing can be done. It’s just life in modern Britain. We need random immigrants to make up the numbers. Expect a lot more of it. Well things can be done, it’s entirely possible to have an adequate asylum system, a healthy level of immigration and real the rewards from it - this happens in a great many countries. What it needs is adequate management and support. Two things that our present government are particular bad at. Nothing will be done. If you think things will improve under Labour you are kidding yourself. It will just be a government full of people who don’t even know why we have borders. It will just be globalism from a slightly different perspective. The dominant culture of the administrative state today is inaction. All that ordinary people can do is stay vigilant and hope that they don’t attract the attention of the next nutjob with a knife and a grudge. And if they do, well bad luck and expect some headlines in the press for a couple of days as an obituary." You said ‘nothing can be done’. I said you’re wrong (and you are). Do I expect much to change? Not really, but it could be changed with the willpower to do so. What we absolutely shouldn’t do, is throw the baby out with the bathwater and take a knee-jerk reaction to isolated incidents (as some will be clamouring to do) | |||
"Cultural enrichment. Nothing can be done. It’s just life in modern Britain. We need random immigrants to make up the numbers. Expect a lot more of it. Well things can be done, it’s entirely possible to have an adequate asylum system, a healthy level of immigration and real the rewards from it - this happens in a great many countries. What it needs is adequate management and support. Two things that our present government are particular bad at. Nothing will be done. If you think things will improve under Labour you are kidding yourself. It will just be a government full of people who don’t even know why we have borders. It will just be globalism from a slightly different perspective. The dominant culture of the administrative state today is inaction. All that ordinary people can do is stay vigilant and hope that they don’t attract the attention of the next nutjob with a knife and a grudge. And if they do, well bad luck and expect some headlines in the press for a couple of days as an obituary. You said ‘nothing can be done’. I said you’re wrong (and you are). Do I expect much to change? Not really, but it could be changed with the willpower to do so. What we absolutely shouldn’t do, is throw the baby out with the bathwater and take a knee-jerk reaction to isolated incidents (as some will be clamouring to do)" With the number of incidents, I think it's safe to say we can stop using words like 'isolated'. | |||
"Cultural enrichment. Nothing can be done. It’s just life in modern Britain. We need random immigrants to make up the numbers. Expect a lot more of it. Well things can be done, it’s entirely possible to have an adequate asylum system, a healthy level of immigration and real the rewards from it - this happens in a great many countries. What it needs is adequate management and support. Two things that our present government are particular bad at. Nothing will be done. If you think things will improve under Labour you are kidding yourself. It will just be a government full of people who don’t even know why we have borders. It will just be globalism from a slightly different perspective. The dominant culture of the administrative state today is inaction. All that ordinary people can do is stay vigilant and hope that they don’t attract the attention of the next nutjob with a knife and a grudge. And if they do, well bad luck and expect some headlines in the press for a couple of days as an obituary. You said ‘nothing can be done’. I said you’re wrong (and you are). Do I expect much to change? Not really, but it could be changed with the willpower to do so. What we absolutely shouldn’t do, is throw the baby out with the bathwater and take a knee-jerk reaction to isolated incidents (as some will be clamouring to do) With the number of incidents, I think it's safe to say we can stop using words like 'isolated'." You may think that, you’re entitled to do so. They’re still isolated incidents though. | |||
"What the actual fuck is going on here?? This guy failed 2 asylum applications, was convicted of a sex crime, changed his religion to Christianity and claimed his life would be in danger if he returned to Afghanistan and was granted asylum on the third attempt. Tell me again that people don't know how to play our system. " We just need to have a functioning Home Office. For all the hot air that the Conservatives shout about immigration, they can’t organise a piss up in a brewery. The Home office has to be fit for purpose and it isn’t and hasn’t been for a long time. A good start would be for the home Office to be headed by a Secretary of State that could display some level of competence. There is no excuse for failed asylum seekers being in the country. There is one government department to blame and the government itself for not being able to run it. | |||
" There is no excuse for failed asylum seekers being in the country. There is one government department to blame and the government itself for not being able to run it." This is it in a nutshell. | |||
"What the actual fuck is going on here?? This guy failed 2 asylum applications, was convicted of a sex crime, changed his religion to Christianity and claimed his life would be in danger if he returned to Afghanistan and was granted asylum on the third attempt. Tell me again that people don't know how to play our system. We just need to have a functioning Home Office. For all the hot air that the Conservatives shout about immigration, they can’t organise a piss up in a brewery. The Home office has to be fit for purpose and it isn’t and hasn’t been for a long time. A good start would be for the home Office to be headed by a Secretary of State that could display some level of competence. There is no excuse for failed asylum seekers being in the country. There is one government department to blame and the government itself for not being able to run it." We need a functioning home office, less 'do-gooders' and tighter laws. | |||
"Cultural enrichment. Nothing can be done. It’s just life in modern Britain. We need random immigrants to make up the numbers. Expect a lot more of it. can be done, it’s entirely possible to have an adequate asylum system, a healthy level of immigration and real the rewards from it - this happens in a great many countries. What it needs is adequate management and support. Two things that our present government are particular bad at. Nothing will be done. If you think things will improve under Labour you are kidding yourself. It will just be a government full of people who don’t even know why we have borders. It will just be globalism from a slightly different perspective. The dominant culture of the administrative state today is inaction. All that ordinary people can do is stay vigilant and hope that they don’t attract the attention of the next nutjob with a knife and a grudge. And if they do, well bad luck and expect some headlines in the press for a couple of days as an obituary. You said ‘nothing can be done’. I said you’re wrong (and you are). Do I expect much to change? Not really, but it could be changed with the willpower to do so. What we absolutely shouldn’t do, is throw the baby out with the bathwater and take a knee-jerk reaction to isolated incidents (as some will be clamouring to do) With the number of incidents, I think it's safe to say we can stop using words like 'isolated'. You may think that, you’re entitled to do so. They’re still isolated incidents though. " It's like saying almost every crime ever, is isolated. There comes a time when we must stop saying that and start addressing the problem. | |||
"What the actual fuck is going on here?? This guy failed 2 asylum applications, was convicted of a sex crime, changed his religion to Christianity and claimed his life would be in danger if he returned to Afghanistan and was granted asylum on the third attempt. Tell me again that people don't know how to play our system. We just need to have a functioning Home Office. For all the hot air that the Conservatives shout about immigration, they can’t organise a piss up in a brewery. The Home office has to be fit for purpose and it isn’t and hasn’t been for a long time. A good start would be for the home Office to be headed by a Secretary of State that could display some level of competence. There is no excuse for failed asylum seekers being in the country. There is one government department to blame and the government itself for not being able to run it. We need a functioning home office, less 'do-gooders' and tighter laws. " If we have a functioning home office, the rest works - because we have laws in place now. And ‘do gooders’ work within the framework that has been provided. | |||
"Cultural enrichment. Nothing can be done. It’s just life in modern Britain. We need random immigrants to make up the numbers. Expect a lot more of it. can be done, it’s entirely possible to have an adequate asylum system, a healthy level of immigration and real the rewards from it - this happens in a great many countries. What it needs is adequate management and support. Two things that our present government are particular bad at. Nothing will be done. If you think things will improve under Labour you are kidding yourself. It will just be a government full of people who don’t even know why we have borders. It will just be globalism from a slightly different perspective. The dominant culture of the administrative state today is inaction. All that ordinary people can do is stay vigilant and hope that they don’t attract the attention of the next nutjob with a knife and a grudge. And if they do, well bad luck and expect some headlines in the press for a couple of days as an obituary. You said ‘nothing can be done’. I said you’re wrong (and you are). Do I expect much to change? Not really, but it could be changed with the willpower to do so. What we absolutely shouldn’t do, is throw the baby out with the bathwater and take a knee-jerk reaction to isolated incidents (as some will be clamouring to do) With the number of incidents, I think it's safe to say we can stop using words like 'isolated'. You may think that, you’re entitled to do so. They’re still isolated incidents though. It's like saying almost every crime ever, is isolated. There comes a time when we must stop saying that and start addressing the problem. " And we address the problem as we’ve discussed, by fixing the asylum system so that it’s fair and properly implemented. I don’t think asylum seekers going crazy and attacking people is more of a risk in the country than domestic violence or football hooliganism or myriad other crimes. I’d like to see the data on it. | |||
| |||
"What the actual fuck is going on here?? This guy failed 2 asylum applications, was convicted of a sex crime, changed his religion to Christianity and claimed his life would be in danger if he returned to Afghanistan and was granted asylum on the third attempt. Tell me again that people don't know how to play our system. We just need to have a functioning Home Office. For all the hot air that the Conservatives shout about immigration, they can’t organise a piss up in a brewery. The Home office has to be fit for purpose and it isn’t and hasn’t been for a long time. A good start would be for the home Office to be headed by a Secretary of State that could display some level of competence. There is no excuse for failed asylum seekers being in the country. There is one government department to blame and the government itself for not being able to run it. We need a functioning home office, less 'do-gooders' and tighter laws. If we have a functioning home office, the rest works - because we have laws in place now. And ‘do gooders’ work within the framework that has been provided." Clearly the framework isn't tight enough, this case and many many others show that. | |||
"Cultural enrichment. Nothing can be done. It’s just life in modern Britain. We need random immigrants to make up the numbers. Expect a lot more of it. can be done, it’s entirely possible to have an adequate asylum system, a healthy level of immigration and real the rewards from it - this happens in a great many countries. What it needs is adequate management and support. Two things that our present government are particular bad at. Nothing will be done. If you think things will improve under Labour you are kidding yourself. It will just be a government full of people who don’t even know why we have borders. It will just be globalism from a slightly different perspective. The dominant culture of the administrative state today is inaction. All that ordinary people can do is stay vigilant and hope that they don’t attract the attention of the next nutjob with a knife and a grudge. And if they do, well bad luck and expect some headlines in the press for a couple of days as an obituary. You said ‘nothing can be done’. I said you’re wrong (and you are). Do I expect much to change? Not really, but it could be changed with the willpower to do so. What we absolutely shouldn’t do, is throw the baby out with the bathwater and take a knee-jerk reaction to isolated incidents (as some will be clamouring to do) With the number of incidents, I think it's safe to say we can stop using words like 'isolated'. You may think that, you’re entitled to do so. They’re still isolated incidents though. It's like saying almost every crime ever, is isolated. There comes a time when we must stop saying that and start addressing the problem. And we address the problem as we’ve discussed, by fixing the asylum system so that it’s fair and properly implemented. I don’t think asylum seekers going crazy and attacking people is more of a risk in the country than domestic violence or football hooliganism or myriad other crimes. I’d like to see the data on it. " It doesn't matter if they are more of a risk or not. We have problems in other areas so we should just import even more problems? | |||
" There is no excuse for failed asylum seekers being in the country. There is one government department to blame and the government itself for not being able to run it. This is it in a nutshell. " I recall Labour’s John Reid saying that the immigration service wasn’t fit for purpose back in 2006. And here we are twenty years later, Labour, LibDem, and Conservative governments, and the Home Office isn’t fit for purpose. But sure, I’m wrong and you are right. Something is going to be done. Cloud cuckoo land. | |||
"What the actual fuck is going on here?? This guy failed 2 asylum applications, was convicted of a sex crime, changed his religion to Christianity and claimed his life would be in danger if he returned to Afghanistan and was granted asylum on the third attempt. Tell me again that people don't know how to play our system. We just need to have a functioning Home Office. For all the hot air that the Conservatives shout about immigration, they can’t organise a piss up in a brewery. The Home office has to be fit for purpose and it isn’t and hasn’t been for a long time. A good start would be for the home Office to be headed by a Secretary of State that could display some level of competence. There is no excuse for failed asylum seekers being in the country. There is one government department to blame and the government itself for not being able to run it. We need a functioning home office, less 'do-gooders' and tighter laws. If we have a functioning home office, the rest works - because we have laws in place now. And ‘do gooders’ work within the framework that has been provided. Clearly the framework isn't tight enough, this case and many many others show that. " Agreed. The appeal system in particular should apparently be more diligently enforced. That doesn’t mean we need fewer ‘do gooders’ (that’s an awful term btw) or law changes. | |||
" There is no excuse for failed asylum seekers being in the country. There is one government department to blame and the government itself for not being able to run it. This is it in a nutshell. I recall Labour’s John Reid saying that the immigration service wasn’t fit for purpose back in 2006. And here we are twenty years later, Labour, LibDem, and Conservative governments, and the Home Office isn’t fit for purpose. But sure, I’m wrong and you are right. Something is going to be done. Cloud cuckoo land." Are you suggesting that the home office is fit for purpose? How would you deal with asylum seekers, dare I ask? | |||
"What the actual fuck is going on here?? This guy failed 2 asylum applications, was convicted of a sex crime, changed his religion to Christianity and claimed his life would be in danger if he returned to Afghanistan and was granted asylum on the third attempt. Tell me again that people don't know how to play our system. We just need to have a functioning Home Office. For all the hot air that the Conservatives shout about immigration, they can’t organise a piss up in a brewery. The Home office has to be fit for purpose and it isn’t and hasn’t been for a long time. A good start would be for the home Office to be headed by a Secretary of State that could display some level of competence. There is no excuse for failed asylum seekers being in the country. There is one government department to blame and the government itself for not being able to run it. We need a functioning home office, less 'do-gooders' and tighter laws. If we have a functioning home office, the rest works - because we have laws in place now. And ‘do gooders’ work within the framework that has been provided. Clearly the framework isn't tight enough, this case and many many others show that. Agreed. The appeal system in particular should apparently be more diligently enforced. That doesn’t mean we need fewer ‘do gooders’ (that’s an awful term btw) or law changes. " I can change it to asylum chasers if you'd prefer. We clamped down on ambulance chasers, now we need to do the same with asylum lawyers. We've already seen evidence that some are corrupt, 'isolated' I hear. | |||
"What the actual fuck is going on here?? This guy failed 2 asylum applications, was convicted of a sex crime, changed his religion to Christianity and claimed his life would be in danger if he returned to Afghanistan and was granted asylum on the third attempt. Tell me again that people don't know how to play our system. We just need to have a functioning Home Office. For all the hot air that the Conservatives shout about immigration, they can’t organise a piss up in a brewery. The Home office has to be fit for purpose and it isn’t and hasn’t been for a long time. A good start would be for the home Office to be headed by a Secretary of State that could display some level of competence. There is no excuse for failed asylum seekers being in the country. There is one government department to blame and the government itself for not being able to run it. We need a functioning home office, less 'do-gooders' and tighter laws. If we have a functioning home office, the rest works - because we have laws in place now. And ‘do gooders’ work within the framework that has been provided. Clearly the framework isn't tight enough, this case and many many others show that. Agreed. The appeal system in particular should apparently be more diligently enforced. That doesn’t mean we need fewer ‘do gooders’ (that’s an awful term btw) or law changes. I can change it to asylum chasers if you'd prefer. We clamped down on ambulance chasers, now we need to do the same with asylum lawyers. We've already seen evidence that some are corrupt, 'isolated' I hear. " Indeed, those corrupt asylum lawyers should be clamped down on. What percentage of asylum lawyers are corrupt? Do you know? | |||
"What the actual fuck is going on here?? This guy failed 2 asylum applications, was convicted of a sex crime, changed his religion to Christianity and claimed his life would be in danger if he returned to Afghanistan and was granted asylum on the third attempt. Tell me again that people don't know how to play our system. We just need to have a functioning Home Office. For all the hot air that the Conservatives shout about immigration, they can’t organise a piss up in a brewery. The Home office has to be fit for purpose and it isn’t and hasn’t been for a long time. A good start would be for the home Office to be headed by a Secretary of State that could display some level of competence. There is no excuse for failed asylum seekers being in the country. There is one government department to blame and the government itself for not being able to run it. We need a functioning home office, less 'do-gooders' and tighter laws. If we have a functioning home office, the rest works - because we have laws in place now. And ‘do gooders’ work within the framework that has been provided. Clearly the framework isn't tight enough, this case and many many others show that. Agreed. The appeal system in particular should apparently be more diligently enforced. That doesn’t mean we need fewer ‘do gooders’ (that’s an awful term btw) or law changes. I can change it to asylum chasers if you'd prefer. We clamped down on ambulance chasers, now we need to do the same with asylum lawyers. We've already seen evidence that some are corrupt, 'isolated' I hear. Indeed, those corrupt asylum lawyers should be clamped down on. What percentage of asylum lawyers are corrupt? Do you know? " . Why would the percentage be relevant. There was an excellent article in the national press recently about immigration lawyers milking the system. Their fees are all paid for by hard working players. Some were suspended by the Law Society . | |||
"What the actual fuck is going on here?? This guy failed 2 asylum applications, was convicted of a sex crime, changed his religion to Christianity and claimed his life would be in danger if he returned to Afghanistan and was granted asylum on the third attempt. Tell me again that people don't know how to play our system. We just need to have a functioning Home Office. For all the hot air that the Conservatives shout about immigration, they can’t organise a piss up in a brewery. The Home office has to be fit for purpose and it isn’t and hasn’t been for a long time. A good start would be for the home Office to be headed by a Secretary of State that could display some level of competence. There is no excuse for failed asylum seekers being in the country. There is one government department to blame and the government itself for not being able to run it. We need a functioning home office, less 'do-gooders' and tighter laws. If we have a functioning home office, the rest works - because we have laws in place now. And ‘do gooders’ work within the framework that has been provided. Clearly the framework isn't tight enough, this case and many many others show that. Agreed. The appeal system in particular should apparently be more diligently enforced. That doesn’t mean we need fewer ‘do gooders’ (that’s an awful term btw) or law changes. I can change it to asylum chasers if you'd prefer. We clamped down on ambulance chasers, now we need to do the same with asylum lawyers. We've already seen evidence that some are corrupt, 'isolated' I hear. Indeed, those corrupt asylum lawyers should be clamped down on. What percentage of asylum lawyers are corrupt? Do you know? . Why would the percentage be relevant. There was an excellent article in the national press recently about immigration lawyers milking the system. Their fees are all paid for by hard working players. Some were suspended by the Law Society ." The percentage matters because we need to know the scale of the problem. Even 1 rotten egg is too many, but realistically there’ll always be some. | |||
"What the actual fuck is going on here?? This guy failed 2 asylum applications, was convicted of a sex crime, changed his religion to Christianity and claimed his life would be in danger if he returned to Afghanistan and was granted asylum on the third attempt. Tell me again that people don't know how to play our system. We just need to have a functioning Home Office. For all the hot air that the Conservatives shout about immigration, they can’t organise a piss up in a brewery. The Home office has to be fit for purpose and it isn’t and hasn’t been for a long time. A good start would be for the home Office to be headed by a Secretary of State that could display some level of competence. There is no excuse for failed asylum seekers being in the country. There is one government department to blame and the government itself for not being able to run it. We need a functioning home office, less 'do-gooders' and tighter laws. If we have a functioning home office, the rest works - because we have laws in place now. And ‘do gooders’ work within the framework that has been provided. Clearly the framework isn't tight enough, this case and many many others show that. Agreed. The appeal system in particular should apparently be more diligently enforced. That doesn’t mean we need fewer ‘do gooders’ (that’s an awful term btw) or law changes. I can change it to asylum chasers if you'd prefer. We clamped down on ambulance chasers, now we need to do the same with asylum lawyers. We've already seen evidence that some are corrupt, 'isolated' I hear. Indeed, those corrupt asylum lawyers should be clamped down on. What percentage of asylum lawyers are corrupt? Do you know? " Do you believe we have a knife problem in this country? | |||
"What the actual fuck is going on here?? This guy failed 2 asylum applications, was convicted of a sex crime, changed his religion to Christianity and claimed his life would be in danger if he returned to Afghanistan and was granted asylum on the third attempt. Tell me again that people don't know how to play our system. We just need to have a functioning Home Office. For all the hot air that the Conservatives shout about immigration, they can’t organise a piss up in a brewery. The Home office has to be fit for purpose and it isn’t and hasn’t been for a long time. A good start would be for the home Office to be headed by a Secretary of State that could display some level of competence. There is no excuse for failed asylum seekers being in the country. There is one government department to blame and the government itself for not being able to run it. We need a functioning home office, less 'do-gooders' and tighter laws. If we have a functioning home office, the rest works - because we have laws in place now. And ‘do gooders’ work within the framework that has been provided. Clearly the framework isn't tight enough, this case and many many others show that. Agreed. The appeal system in particular should apparently be more diligently enforced. That doesn’t mean we need fewer ‘do gooders’ (that’s an awful term btw) or law changes. I can change it to asylum chasers if you'd prefer. We clamped down on ambulance chasers, now we need to do the same with asylum lawyers. We've already seen evidence that some are corrupt, 'isolated' I hear. Indeed, those corrupt asylum lawyers should be clamped down on. What percentage of asylum lawyers are corrupt? Do you know? Do you believe we have a knife problem in this country?" I believe we’ve had a knife crime problem for decades in this country. Not as bad as some nations, but nothing to be proud of. | |||
"Absolutely shocking set of events that could have been avoided. That person should have been in jail and deported not allowed to stay here for years appealing home office decisions, and being allowed to walk the streets. If we don't start wise up and start removing these people from our shores once they fail their asylum request, we will always be in danger of criminals / ill intent as they play the system." You are right of course on all points The starting point is not going to their countries starting wars or supplying weapons to those that do, and then whinging about the consequences | |||
"What the actual fuck is going on here?? This guy failed 2 asylum applications, was convicted of a sex crime, changed his religion to Christianity and claimed his life would be in danger if he returned to Afghanistan and was granted asylum on the third attempt. Tell me again that people don't know how to play our system. We just need to have a functioning Home Office. For all the hot air that the Conservatives shout about immigration, they can’t organise a piss up in a brewery. The Home office has to be fit for purpose and it isn’t and hasn’t been for a long time. A good start would be for the home Office to be headed by a Secretary of State that could display some level of competence. There is no excuse for failed asylum seekers being in the country. There is one government department to blame and the government itself for not being able to run it. We need a functioning home office, less 'do-gooders' and tighter laws. If we have a functioning home office, the rest works - because we have laws in place now. And ‘do gooders’ work within the framework that has been provided. Clearly the framework isn't tight enough, this case and many many others show that. Agreed. The appeal system in particular should apparently be more diligently enforced. That doesn’t mean we need fewer ‘do gooders’ (that’s an awful term btw) or law changes. I can change it to asylum chasers if you'd prefer. We clamped down on ambulance chasers, now we need to do the same with asylum lawyers. We've already seen evidence that some are corrupt, 'isolated' I hear. Indeed, those corrupt asylum lawyers should be clamped down on. What percentage of asylum lawyers are corrupt? Do you know? Do you believe we have a knife problem in this country? I believe we’ve had a knife crime problem for decades in this country. Not as bad as some nations, but nothing to be proud of." Do you know what percentage of people in the UK have been involved in committing knife crime? See where I'm going with this? | |||
"What the actual fuck is going on here?? This guy failed 2 asylum applications, was convicted of a sex crime, changed his religion to Christianity and claimed his life would be in danger if he returned to Afghanistan and was granted asylum on the third attempt. Tell me again that people don't know how to play our system. We just need to have a functioning Home Office. For all the hot air that the Conservatives shout about immigration, they can’t organise a piss up in a brewery. The Home office has to be fit for purpose and it isn’t and hasn’t been for a long time. A good start would be for the home Office to be headed by a Secretary of State that could display some level of competence. There is no excuse for failed asylum seekers being in the country. There is one government department to blame and the government itself for not being able to run it. We need a functioning home office, less 'do-gooders' and tighter laws. If we have a functioning home office, the rest works - because we have laws in place now. And ‘do gooders’ work within the framework that has been provided. Clearly the framework isn't tight enough, this case and many many others show that. Agreed. The appeal system in particular should apparently be more diligently enforced. That doesn’t mean we need fewer ‘do gooders’ (that’s an awful term btw) or law changes. I can change it to asylum chasers if you'd prefer. We clamped down on ambulance chasers, now we need to do the same with asylum lawyers. We've already seen evidence that some are corrupt, 'isolated' I hear. Indeed, those corrupt asylum lawyers should be clamped down on. What percentage of asylum lawyers are corrupt? Do you know? Do you believe we have a knife problem in this country? I believe we’ve had a knife crime problem for decades in this country. Not as bad as some nations, but nothing to be proud of. Do you know what percentage of people in the UK have been involved in committing knife crime? See where I'm going with this?" Of course I do. Do you worry about being stabbed when you leave the house? | |||
"What the actual fuck is going on here?? This guy failed 2 asylum applications, was convicted of a sex crime, changed his religion to Christianity and claimed his life would be in danger if he returned to Afghanistan and was granted asylum on the third attempt. Tell me again that people don't know how to play our system. We just need to have a functioning Home Office. For all the hot air that the Conservatives shout about immigration, they can’t organise a piss up in a brewery. The Home office has to be fit for purpose and it isn’t and hasn’t been for a long time. A good start would be for the home Office to be headed by a Secretary of State that could display some level of competence. There is no excuse for failed asylum seekers being in the country. There is one government department to blame and the government itself for not being able to run it. We need a functioning home office, less 'do-gooders' and tighter laws. If we have a functioning home office, the rest works - because we have laws in place now. And ‘do gooders’ work within the framework that has been provided. Clearly the framework isn't tight enough, this case and many many others show that. Agreed. The appeal system in particular should apparently be more diligently enforced. That doesn’t mean we need fewer ‘do gooders’ (that’s an awful term btw) or law changes. I can change it to asylum chasers if you'd prefer. We clamped down on ambulance chasers, now we need to do the same with asylum lawyers. We've already seen evidence that some are corrupt, 'isolated' I hear. Indeed, those corrupt asylum lawyers should be clamped down on. What percentage of asylum lawyers are corrupt? Do you know? Do you believe we have a knife problem in this country? I believe we’ve had a knife crime problem for decades in this country. Not as bad as some nations, but nothing to be proud of. Do you know what percentage of people in the UK have been involved in committing knife crime? See where I'm going with this? Of course I do. Do you worry about being stabbed when you leave the house? " I worry about my kids being stabbed. I'm not one to worry about myself, I'll be fine. | |||
"What the actual fuck is going on here?? This guy failed 2 asylum applications, was convicted of a sex crime, changed his religion to Christianity and claimed his life would be in danger if he returned to Afghanistan and was granted asylum on the third attempt. Tell me again that people don't know how to play our system. We just need to have a functioning Home Office. For all the hot air that the Conservatives shout about immigration, they can’t organise a piss up in a brewery. The Home office has to be fit for purpose and it isn’t and hasn’t been for a long time. A good start would be for the home Office to be headed by a Secretary of State that could display some level of competence. There is no excuse for failed asylum seekers being in the country. There is one government department to blame and the government itself for not being able to run it. We need a functioning home office, less 'do-gooders' and tighter laws. If we have a functioning home office, the rest works - because we have laws in place now. And ‘do gooders’ work within the framework that has been provided. Clearly the framework isn't tight enough, this case and many many others show that. Agreed. The appeal system in particular should apparently be more diligently enforced. That doesn’t mean we need fewer ‘do gooders’ (that’s an awful term btw) or law changes. I can change it to asylum chasers if you'd prefer. We clamped down on ambulance chasers, now we need to do the same with asylum lawyers. We've already seen evidence that some are corrupt, 'isolated' I hear. Indeed, those corrupt asylum lawyers should be clamped down on. What percentage of asylum lawyers are corrupt? Do you know? Do you believe we have a knife problem in this country? I believe we’ve had a knife crime problem for decades in this country. Not as bad as some nations, but nothing to be proud of. Do you know what percentage of people in the UK have been involved in committing knife crime? See where I'm going with this? Of course I do. Do you worry about being stabbed when you leave the house? I worry about my kids being stabbed. I'm not one to worry about myself, I'll be fine. " Do you worry about it because it’s likely, or because that’s what parents do? My eldest is starting driving lessons this year, I’m terrified that she’ll have a bad accident - it’s natural. But that feeling isn’t always objective. | |||
" There is no excuse for failed asylum seekers being in the country. There is one government department to blame and the government itself for not being able to run it. This is it in a nutshell. I recall Labour’s John Reid saying that the immigration service wasn’t fit for purpose back in 2006. And here we are twenty years later, Labour, LibDem, and Conservative governments, and the Home Office isn’t fit for purpose. But sure, I’m wrong and you are right. Something is going to be done. Cloud cuckoo land. Are you suggesting that the home office is fit for purpose? How would you deal with asylum seekers, dare I ask? " No I’m not suggesting that the Home Office is fit for purpose. As I said, it wasn’t fit for purpose under Labour by Labour’s own admission. And it isn’t now. And it won’t be under the next government. It hasn’t been fit for purpose for decades and it won’t be fit for purpose for decades to come under the existing political system. There is simply no political will in this country to have an immigration and asylum policy and system that exists to benefit the population of the country. Its primary purpose is, and has been for decades, to benefit immigrants. | |||
"What the actual fuck is going on here?? This guy failed 2 asylum applications, was convicted of a sex crime, changed his religion to Christianity and claimed his life would be in danger if he returned to Afghanistan and was granted asylum on the third attempt. Tell me again that people don't know how to play our system. We just need to have a functioning Home Office. For all the hot air that the Conservatives shout about immigration, they can’t organise a piss up in a brewery. The Home office has to be fit for purpose and it isn’t and hasn’t been for a long time. A good start would be for the home Office to be headed by a Secretary of State that could display some level of competence. There is no excuse for failed asylum seekers being in the country. There is one government department to blame and the government itself for not being able to run it. We need a functioning home office, less 'do-gooders' and tighter laws. If we have a functioning home office, the rest works - because we have laws in place now. And ‘do gooders’ work within the framework that has been provided. Clearly the framework isn't tight enough, this case and many many others show that. Agreed. The appeal system in particular should apparently be more diligently enforced. That doesn’t mean we need fewer ‘do gooders’ (that’s an awful term btw) or law changes. I can change it to asylum chasers if you'd prefer. We clamped down on ambulance chasers, now we need to do the same with asylum lawyers. We've already seen evidence that some are corrupt, 'isolated' I hear. Indeed, those corrupt asylum lawyers should be clamped down on. What percentage of asylum lawyers are corrupt? Do you know? Do you believe we have a knife problem in this country? I believe we’ve had a knife crime problem for decades in this country. Not as bad as some nations, but nothing to be proud of. Do you know what percentage of people in the UK have been involved in committing knife crime? See where I'm going with this? Of course I do. Do you worry about being stabbed when you leave the house? I worry about my kids being stabbed. I'm not one to worry about myself, I'll be fine. " London is the knife-crime capital of the U.K., right? Well I’ve been in and around London for 30+ years. How many fights have I seen where a blade has been pulled in that time? One. (And everyone scattered, thankfully) Knife crime, like this asylum seeker, is horrendous and needs dealing with - but it’s still a comparative rarity in daily life. | |||
" There is no excuse for failed asylum seekers being in the country. There is one government department to blame and the government itself for not being able to run it. This is it in a nutshell. I recall Labour’s John Reid saying that the immigration service wasn’t fit for purpose back in 2006. And here we are twenty years later, Labour, LibDem, and Conservative governments, and the Home Office isn’t fit for purpose. But sure, I’m wrong and you are right. Something is going to be done. Cloud cuckoo land. Are you suggesting that the home office is fit for purpose? How would you deal with asylum seekers, dare I ask? No I’m not suggesting that the Home Office is fit for purpose. As I said, it wasn’t fit for purpose under Labour by Labour’s own admission. And it isn’t now. And it won’t be under the next government. It hasn’t been fit for purpose for decades and it won’t be fit for purpose for decades to come under the existing political system. There is simply no political will in this country to have an immigration and asylum policy and system that exists to benefit the population of the country. Its primary purpose is, and has been for decades, to benefit immigrants." Does immigration benefit the country, in your opinion? And I’m still waiting to hear your view on how our asylum system should work. | |||
"What the actual fuck is going on here?? This guy failed 2 asylum applications, was convicted of a sex crime, changed his religion to Christianity and claimed his life would be in danger if he returned to Afghanistan and was granted asylum on the third attempt. Tell me again that people don't know how to play our system. We just need to have a functioning Home Office. For all the hot air that the Conservatives shout about immigration, they can’t organise a piss up in a brewery. The Home office has to be fit for purpose and it isn’t and hasn’t been for a long time. A good start would be for the home Office to be headed by a Secretary of State that could display some level of competence. There is no excuse for failed asylum seekers being in the country. There is one government department to blame and the government itself for not being able to run it. We need a functioning home office, less 'do-gooders' and tighter laws. If we have a functioning home office, the rest works - because we have laws in place now. And ‘do gooders’ work within the framework that has been provided. Clearly the framework isn't tight enough, this case and many many others show that. Agreed. The appeal system in particular should apparently be more diligently enforced. That doesn’t mean we need fewer ‘do gooders’ (that’s an awful term btw) or law changes. I can change it to asylum chasers if you'd prefer. We clamped down on ambulance chasers, now we need to do the same with asylum lawyers. We've already seen evidence that some are corrupt, 'isolated' I hear. Indeed, those corrupt asylum lawyers should be clamped down on. What percentage of asylum lawyers are corrupt? Do you know? Do you believe we have a knife problem in this country? I believe we’ve had a knife crime problem for decades in this country. Not as bad as some nations, but nothing to be proud of. Do you know what percentage of people in the UK have been involved in committing knife crime? See where I'm going with this? Of course I do. Do you worry about being stabbed when you leave the house? I worry about my kids being stabbed. I'm not one to worry about myself, I'll be fine. Do you worry about it because it’s likely, or because that’s what parents do? My eldest is starting driving lessons this year, I’m terrified that she’ll have a bad accident - it’s natural. But that feeling isn’t always objective. " I worry about it because of the increase in knife crime in my area. Of course there's always natural worry, when my oldest started driving I installed a 'tracker' on her phone, it tells me when she's been driving and notifies me of collisions (she hasn't had one), I can use it to check she's in her bed in the mornings now she's away at uni. This all may seem a bit over the top but I'm scared shirtless my kids will come to harm because of society. I never worried about my sisters 10 years ago. | |||
" There is no excuse for failed asylum seekers being in the country. There is one government department to blame and the government itself for not being able to run it. This is it in a nutshell. I recall Labour’s John Reid saying that the immigration service wasn’t fit for purpose back in 2006. And here we are twenty years later, Labour, LibDem, and Conservative governments, and the Home Office isn’t fit for purpose. But sure, I’m wrong and you are right. Something is going to be done. Cloud cuckoo land. Are you suggesting that the home office is fit for purpose? How would you deal with asylum seekers, dare I ask? No I’m not suggesting that the Home Office is fit for purpose. As I said, it wasn’t fit for purpose under Labour by Labour’s own admission. And it isn’t now. And it won’t be under the next government. It hasn’t been fit for purpose for decades and it won’t be fit for purpose for decades to come under the existing political system. There is simply no political will in this country to have an immigration and asylum policy and system that exists to benefit the population of the country. Its primary purpose is, and has been for decades, to benefit immigrants. Does immigration benefit the country, in your opinion? And I’m still waiting to hear your view on how our asylum system should work. " It’s not possible to say in such simple terms whether “immigration benefits the country” or not. Some does, some doesn’t. The dial in this country has been set way too far to the end that doesn’t. As for the asylum system it would seem to be pretty obvious that a sex offender who pretends to be a Christian to game the system should have been kicked out a long time ago. We have been here before with the “Christianity” excuse. There should be a complete review of every asylum seeker who has used that as an excuse. Presumably the lawyers find a ruse that works and then advise all of their clients to do the same. It’s should be quite obvious to the case workers and tribunals what is happening as they will see the pattern developing pretty quickly. | |||
| |||
"All part and parcel of living in a big city ... Wonder who said that?" Was it incorrect? (Although he was talking about terror attacks in that quote) | |||
"Does immigration benefit the country, in your opinion? And I’m still waiting to hear your view on how our asylum system should work. " If I can answer these questions: Immigration works when people needed to improve the country though skills and services that we cannot supply ourselves. this is a win win. Immigration that is not controlled and floods the market taking jobs that we can supply ourselves is not useful and should not happen. Asylum should work very simply, arrive here by illegal means, and without papers that can identify you clearly. Deport. | |||
" Asylum should work very simply, arrive here by illegal means, and without papers that can identify you clearly. Deport." How can an asylum seeker arrive here legally (excepting a few schemes)? | |||
" Asylum should work very simply, arrive here by illegal means, and without papers that can identify you clearly. Deport. How can an asylum seeker arrive here legally (excepting a few schemes)?" It is the papers and identity that is the key part. | |||
| |||
" Asylum should work very simply, arrive here by illegal means, and without papers that can identify you clearly. Deport. How can an asylum seeker arrive here legally (excepting a few schemes)? It is the papers and identity that is the key part." Not according to UK govt. There are a small number of safe and legal routes for people to seek asylum in the U.K. (from Afghanistan, Ukraine or Hong Kong), some regufeee family reunion or refugees resettlement schemes which are limited in scope, and that’s about it. | |||
" Asylum should work very simply, arrive here by illegal means, and without papers that can identify you clearly. Deport. How can an asylum seeker arrive here legally (excepting a few schemes)? It is the papers and identity that is the key part. Not according to UK govt. There are a small number of safe and legal routes for people to seek asylum in the U.K. (from Afghanistan, Ukraine or Hong Kong), some regufeee family reunion or refugees resettlement schemes which are limited in scope, and that’s about it. " Take a step back before we go down the rabbit hole.... I said "Asylum should work very simply, arrive here by illegal means, and without papers that can identify you clearly. Deport" If someone arrives here illegally and has papers that can clearly identify themselves, they have got to level 1, still not ideal but at least we know who they are. My point being if a person can't prove who they are they must be removed. | |||
| |||
"Having scrolled through 'umpteen re-quoted passages beginning with "What the actual fuck is going on here??..." and continuing ad nauseam, I have yet to see anything mentioned in the thread about 'Clapham attacks'." I was hoping this post would change the trajectory, but alas...  | |||
"Having scrolled through 'umpteen re-quoted passages beginning with "What the actual fuck is going on here??..." and continuing ad nauseam, I have yet to see anything mentioned in the thread about 'Clapham attacks'." If the OP is being reposted as you say then every single post under that relates to the Clapham attacks as that is what the OP is about. You're welcome | |||
"What the actual fuck is going on here?? This guy failed 2 asylum applications, was convicted of a sex crime, changed his religion to Christianity and claimed his life would be in danger if he returned to Afghanistan and was granted asylum on the third attempt. Tell me again that people don't know how to play our system. We just need to have a functioning Home Office. For all the hot air that the Conservatives shout about immigration, they can’t organise a piss up in a brewery. The Home office has to be fit for purpose and it isn’t and hasn’t been for a long time. A good start would be for the home Office to be headed by a Secretary of State that could display some level of competence. There is no excuse for failed asylum seekers being in the country. There is one government department to blame and the government itself for not being able to run it. We need a functioning home office, less 'do-gooders' and tighter laws. If we have a functioning home office, the rest works - because we have laws in place now. And ‘do gooders’ work within the framework that has been provided. Clearly the framework isn't tight enough, this case and many many others show that. Agreed. The appeal system in particular should apparently be more diligently enforced. That doesn’t mean we need fewer ‘do gooders’ (that’s an awful term btw) or law changes. I can change it to asylum chasers if you'd prefer. We clamped down on ambulance chasers, now we need to do the same with asylum lawyers. We've already seen evidence that some are corrupt, 'isolated' I hear. Indeed, those corrupt asylum lawyers should be clamped down on. What percentage of asylum lawyers are corrupt? Do you know? . Why would the percentage be relevant. There was an excellent article in the national press recently about immigration lawyers milking the system. Their fees are all paid for by hard working players. Some were suspended by the Law Society . The percentage matters because we need to know the scale of the problem. Even 1 rotten egg is too many, but realistically there’ll always be some. " . Most rational people would like to prevent crime . Every single illegal entry puts the country at risk and is a drain on societys resources. Even one is one too many . | |||
"What the actual fuck is going on here?? This guy failed 2 asylum applications, was convicted of a sex crime, changed his religion to Christianity and claimed his life would be in danger if he returned to Afghanistan and was granted asylum on the third attempt. Tell me again that people don't know how to play our system. " My thoughts are with the victims at this time. | |||
"What the actual fuck is going on here?? This guy failed 2 asylum applications, was convicted of a sex crime, changed his religion to Christianity and claimed his life would be in danger if he returned to Afghanistan and was granted asylum on the third attempt. Tell me again that people don't know how to play our system. We just need to have a functioning Home Office. For all the hot air that the Conservatives shout about immigration, they can’t organise a piss up in a brewery. The Home office has to be fit for purpose and it isn’t and hasn’t been for a long time. A good start would be for the home Office to be headed by a Secretary of State that could display some level of competence. There is no excuse for failed asylum seekers being in the country. There is one government department to blame and the government itself for not being able to run it. We need a functioning home office, less 'do-gooders' and tighter laws. If we have a functioning home office, the rest works - because we have laws in place now. And ‘do gooders’ work within the framework that has been provided. Clearly the framework isn't tight enough, this case and many many others show that. Agreed. The appeal system in particular should apparently be more diligently enforced. That doesn’t mean we need fewer ‘do gooders’ (that’s an awful term btw) or law changes. I can change it to asylum chasers if you'd prefer. We clamped down on ambulance chasers, now we need to do the same with asylum lawyers. We've already seen evidence that some are corrupt, 'isolated' I hear. Indeed, those corrupt asylum lawyers should be clamped down on. What percentage of asylum lawyers are corrupt? Do you know? . Why would the percentage be relevant. There was an excellent article in the national press recently about immigration lawyers milking the system. Their fees are all paid for by hard working players. Some were suspended by the Law Society . The percentage matters because we need to know the scale of the problem. Even 1 rotten egg is too many, but realistically there’ll always be some. . Most rational people would like to prevent crime . Every single illegal entry puts the country at risk and is a drain on societys resources. Even one is one too many . " That’s why the system needs looking at - but that doesn’t mean not having an asylum system. | |||
"Having scrolled through 'umpteen re-quoted passages beginning with "What the actual fuck is going on here??..." and continuing ad nauseam, I have yet to see anything mentioned in the thread about 'Clapham attacks'. I was hoping this post would change the trajectory, but alas... "Yes, it does seem too have become a heaven sent opportunity for yet another thread about immigration. | |||
"Having scrolled through 'umpteen re-quoted passages beginning with "What the actual fuck is going on here??..." and continuing ad nauseam, I have yet to see anything mentioned in the thread about 'Clapham attacks'. I was hoping this post would change the trajectory, but alas...
Yes, it does seem too have become a heaven sent opportunity for yet another thread about immigration."I think we have established over the last few days that immigration is all wonderful and frankly there just isn’t enough of it. We should celebrate another opportunity to rejoice at our good fortune. | |||
"Having scrolled through 'umpteen re-quoted passages beginning with "What the actual fuck is going on here??..." and continuing ad nauseam, I have yet to see anything mentioned in the thread about 'Clapham attacks'. I was hoping this post would change the trajectory, but alas...
Yes, it does seem too have become a heaven sent opportunity for yet another thread about immigration.
I think we have established over the last few days that immigration is all wonderful and frankly there just isn’t enough of it.
We should celebrate another opportunity to rejoice at our good fortune."Has anyone claimed that all immigration is wonderful? Or has it been pointed out that immigration has overall been a net benefit? And why are you conflating immigration with asylum? - They’re two very different things. | |||
| |||
"Having scrolled through 'umpteen re-quoted passages beginning with "What the actual fuck is going on here??..." and continuing ad nauseam, I have yet to see anything mentioned in the thread about 'Clapham attacks'. I was hoping this post would change the trajectory, but alas...
Yes, it does seem too have become a heaven sent opportunity for yet another thread about immigration."Fab's favourite topic. 'bloody foreigners'. | |||
"Having scrolled through 'umpteen re-quoted passages beginning with "What the actual fuck is going on here??..." and continuing ad nauseam, I have yet to see anything mentioned in the thread about 'Clapham attacks'. I was hoping this post would change the trajectory, but alas...
Yes, it does seem too have become a heaven sent opportunity for yet another thread about immigration.
Fab's favourite topic.
'bloody foreigners'.
"Not forgetting “the science”. | |||
"Having scrolled through 'umpteen re-quoted passages beginning with "What the actual fuck is going on here??..." and continuing ad nauseam, I have yet to see anything mentioned in the thread about 'Clapham attacks'. I was hoping this post would change the trajectory, but alas...
Yes, it does seem too have become a heaven sent opportunity for yet another thread about immigration.
Fab's favourite topic.
'bloody foreigners'.
"When people are regularly being hurt, assaulted and killed them yeah I think people are well within their rights to question immigration and the lack of vetting. Personally I have nothing against anyone who needs help but I think the time has come to stop all immigrants illegal or otherwise entering the UK until a better,fairer and genuinely more robust system is in place to prevent people like this entering the country. Do you think the countries that most of the people come from would put up with us should the situation be reversed?? It's sad that this happens and I feel people who are genuine need of help and assistance are being overlooked in favour of people (mainly single men) exploiting loopholes and knowing how to "play"the system. I hate that we can't help all those who need help but I also hate people taking the piss out of this countries good nature and kindness. Did you know 1300 people entered the country illegally in January of this year alone and that's the ones we know about!! I worked in Harmonndsworth centre back in the early 90's This has been going on for a very long time,I could go on for a long time regards the amount of assistance given from day one all at the UK tax payers expense. Meanwhile we have record numbers of people sleeping rough and using food banks. Something is very wrong with the current system,too many apologists jump to the defence of the criminal elements entering the UK under the guise of "asylum" and turn a blind eye to families unable to heat their homes or feed themselves. You have to see it's possible to be concerned about the current situation with illegal immigrants and not deemed a racist A hole. It's just common and economical sense to question why this is happening and how it can be made fairer, rather than just letting anyone in regardless. The attack in question was sickening and if the man is found once he's been treated,them immediately deported to let the authorities of his home country deal with him. I'm sorry if you all feel that this is a controversial opinion but I can't see how things are going to improve unless a line is drawn in the sand enough is enough. Then once a better system is in place then allow people to enter via the proper channels and not encouraging organised crime syndicates to profit from people trafficking across hazardous seas. | |||
"Having scrolled through 'umpteen re-quoted passages beginning with "What the actual fuck is going on here??..." and continuing ad nauseam, I have yet to see anything mentioned in the thread about 'Clapham attacks'. I was hoping this post would change the trajectory, but alas...
Yes, it does seem too have become a heaven sent opportunity for yet another thread about immigration.
Fab's favourite topic.
'bloody foreigners'.
When people are regularly being hurt, assaulted and killed them yeah I think people are well within their rights to question immigration and the lack of vetting.
Personally I have nothing against anyone who needs help but I think the time has come to stop all immigrants illegal or otherwise entering the UK until a better,fairer and genuinely more robust system is in place to prevent people like this entering the country.
Do you think the countries that most of the people come from would put up with us should the situation be reversed??
It's sad that this happens and I feel people who are genuine need of help and assistance are being overlooked in favour of people (mainly single men) exploiting loopholes and knowing how to "play"the system.
I hate that we can't help all those who need help but I also hate people taking the piss out of this countries good nature and kindness.
Did you know 1300 people entered the country illegally in January of this year alone and that's the ones we know about!!
I worked in Harmonndsworth centre back in the early 90's
This has been going on for a very long time,I could go on for a long time regards the amount of assistance given from day one all at the UK tax payers expense.
Meanwhile we have record numbers of people sleeping rough and using food banks.
Something is very wrong with the current system,too many apologists jump to the defence of the criminal elements entering the UK under the guise of "asylum" and turn a blind eye to families unable to heat their homes or feed themselves.
You have to see it's possible to be concerned about the current situation with illegal immigrants and not deemed a racist A hole.
It's just common and economical sense to question why this is happening and how it can be made fairer, rather than just letting anyone in regardless.
The attack in question was sickening and if the man is found once he's been treated,them immediately deported to let the authorities of his home country deal with him.
I'm sorry if you all feel that this is a controversial opinion but I can't see how things are going to improve unless a line is drawn in the sand enough is enough.
Then once a better system is in place then allow people to enter via the proper channels and not encouraging organised crime syndicates to profit from people trafficking across hazardous seas."You’re punishing all migrants for a problem caused by government, based upon the actions of a few (who wouldn’t have been able to harm anyone if the home office did their job correctly) | |||
| |||
"Was he found guilty of the sexual crimes before or after getting asylum ? And do we know the basis of the two appeals ? " Before And it's not fair, I think was the main argument for his appeals | |||
"Having scrolled through 'umpteen re-quoted passages beginning with "What the actual fuck is going on here??..." and continuing ad nauseam, I have yet to see anything mentioned in the thread about 'Clapham attacks'. I was hoping this post would change the trajectory, but alas...
Yes, it does seem too have become a heaven sent opportunity for yet another thread about immigration.
Fab's favourite topic.
'bloody foreigners'.
When people are regularly being hurt, assaulted and killed them yeah I think people are well within their rights to question immigration and the lack of vetting.
Personally I have nothing against anyone who needs help but I think the time has come to stop all immigrants illegal or otherwise entering the UK until a better,fairer and genuinely more robust system is in place to prevent people like this entering the country.
Do you think the countries that most of the people come from would put up with us should the situation be reversed??
It's sad that this happens and I feel people who are genuine need of help and assistance are being overlooked in favour of people (mainly single men) exploiting loopholes and knowing how to "play"the system.
I hate that we can't help all those who need help but I also hate people taking the piss out of this countries good nature and kindness.
Did you know 1300 people entered the country illegally in January of this year alone and that's the ones we know about!!
I worked in Harmonndsworth centre back in the early 90's
This has been going on for a very long time,I could go on for a long time regards the amount of assistance given from day one all at the UK tax payers expense.
Meanwhile we have record numbers of people sleeping rough and using food banks.
Something is very wrong with the current system,too many apologists jump to the defence of the criminal elements entering the UK under the guise of "asylum" and turn a blind eye to families unable to heat their homes or feed themselves.
You have to see it's possible to be concerned about the current situation with illegal immigrants and not deemed a racist A hole.
It's just common and economical sense to question why this is happening and how it can be made fairer, rather than just letting anyone in regardless.
The attack in question was sickening and if the man is found once he's been treated,them immediately deported to let the authorities of his home country deal with him.
I'm sorry if you all feel that this is a controversial opinion but I can't see how things are going to improve unless a line is drawn in the sand enough is enough.
Then once a better system is in place then allow people to enter via the proper channels and not encouraging organised crime syndicates to profit from people trafficking across hazardous seas."Yeah. Some people have a problem worth immigrants. Some people have a problem with someone who commits a violent crime. Doesn't matter if it's foreigner or not. The only real winner from any of this are sections of the political world and their supporting press who get a lot out of the old 'immigrant does something bad' rhetoric. As this forum demonstrates, it's extremely effective. | |||
"Was he found guilty of the sexual crimes before or after getting asylum ? And do we know the basis of the two appeals ? Before And it's not fair, I think was the main argument for his appeals" lol. No wonder it failed. Particulary Serious Crimes can make you illegible from being able to claim asylum. So if it was serious then I wonder what caused him to continue to make a claim. Have they said if he knew the victims yet ? | |||
" The attack in question was sickening and if the man is found once he's been treated,them immediately deported to let the authorities of his home country deal with him. " We gave him asylum after he was found guilty of a sex crime. I doubt hold out much hope for your (and mine) wishes. | |||
"Was he found guilty of the sexual crimes before or after getting asylum ? And do we know the basis of the two appeals ? Before And it's not fair, I think was the main argument for his appealslol. No wonder it failed. Particulary Serious Crimes can make you illegible from being able to claim asylum. So if it was serious then I wonder what caused him to continue to make a claim. Have they said if he knew the victims yet ?" They believe he knew the mother and 2 kids but nothing more than that as far as I'm aware. | |||
"Was he found guilty of the sexual crimes before or after getting asylum ? And do we know the basis of the two appeals ? Before And it's not fair, I think was the main argument for his appealslol. No wonder it failed. Particulary Serious Crimes can make you illegible from being able to claim asylum. So if it was serious then I wonder what caused him to continue to make a claim. Have they said if he knew the victims yet ?" Sexual assault is right up there in my books. What is worrying, he committed the crime and was allowed to stay for a number of years as he claimed twice more! He also changed his religion to christian.... Makes poor reading if that is how he swung staying in the country. | |||
"Was he found guilty of the sexual crimes before or after getting asylum ? And do we know the basis of the two appeals ? Before And it's not fair, I think was the main argument for his appealslol. No wonder it failed. Particulary Serious Crimes can make you illegible from being able to claim asylum. So if it was serious then I wonder what caused him to continue to make a claim. Have they said if he knew the victims yet ? Sexual assault is right up there in my books. What is worrying, he committed the crime and was allowed to stay for a number of years as he claimed twice more! He also changed his religion to christian.... Makes poor reading if that is how he swung staying in the country." agreed. I'm just trying to work thru if it's the general system or our application of the rules that sucked. | |||
"Was he found guilty of the sexual crimes before or after getting asylum ? And do we know the basis of the two appeals ? Before And it's not fair, I think was the main argument for his appealslol. No wonder it failed. Particulary Serious Crimes can make you illegible from being able to claim asylum. So if it was serious then I wonder what caused him to continue to make a claim. Have they said if he knew the victims yet ? Sexual assault is right up there in my books. What is worrying, he committed the crime and was allowed to stay for a number of years as he claimed twice more! He also changed his religion to christian.... Makes poor reading if that is how he swung staying in the country.agreed. I'm just trying to work thru if it's the general system or our application of the rules that sucked. " It's nearly always application of the rules.We don't enforce them because we wish not to be seen as strict or worse I don't care these people are a danger.If the UN wants to intervene we'll be sure to give them what they want | |||
"Having scrolled through 'umpteen re-quoted passages beginning with "What the actual fuck is going on here??..." and continuing ad nauseam, I have yet to see anything mentioned in the thread about 'Clapham attacks'. I was hoping this post would change the trajectory, but alas...
Yes, it does seem too have become a heaven sent opportunity for yet another thread about immigration.
Fab's favourite topic.
'bloody foreigners'.
When people are regularly being hurt, assaulted and killed them yeah I think people are well within their rights to question immigration and the lack of vetting.
Personally I have nothing against anyone who needs help but I think the time has come to stop all immigrants illegal or otherwise entering the UK until a better,fairer and genuinely more robust system is in place to prevent people like this entering the country.
Do you think the countries that most of the people come from would put up with us should the situation be reversed??
It's sad that this happens and I feel people who are genuine need of help and assistance are being overlooked in favour of people (mainly single men) exploiting loopholes and knowing how to "play"the system.
I hate that we can't help all those who need help but I also hate people taking the piss out of this countries good nature and kindness.
Did you know 1300 people entered the country illegally in January of this year alone and that's the ones we know about!!
I worked in Harmonndsworth centre back in the early 90's
This has been going on for a very long time,I could go on for a long time regards the amount of assistance given from day one all at the UK tax payers expense.
Meanwhile we have record numbers of people sleeping rough and using food banks.
Something is very wrong with the current system,too many apologists jump to the defence of the criminal elements entering the UK under the guise of "asylum" and turn a blind eye to families unable to heat their homes or feed themselves.
You have to see it's possible to be concerned about the current situation with illegal immigrants and not deemed a racist A hole.
It's just common and economical sense to question why this is happening and how it can be made fairer, rather than just letting anyone in regardless.
The attack in question was sickening and if the man is found once he's been treated,them immediately deported to let the authorities of his home country deal with him.
I'm sorry if you all feel that this is a controversial opinion but I can't see how things are going to improve unless a line is drawn in the sand enough is enough.
Then once a better system is in place then allow people to enter via the proper channels and not encouraging organised crime syndicates to profit from people trafficking across hazardous seas.
You’re punishing all migrants for a problem caused by government, based upon the actions of a few (who wouldn’t have been able to harm anyone if the home office did their job correctly)
"So how many deaths does it take then before it becomes serious? 1,10,100 maybe 1000 then perhaps we can say "oh yeah maybe we should have stopped them before this " Now I don't know if you remember but about 7 years ago ISIS said as part of their jihad they where going to flood Europe with holy warriors. Now OBVIOUSLY I'm not saying that they are all part of this,but from what I see Europe is being flooded with many thousands of men from that region whom we have no idea of their intentions. Like I said more robust system in place to filter out the possibility of anyone with questionable motives entering the country. | |||
"Having scrolled through 'umpteen re-quoted passages beginning with "What the actual fuck is going on here??..." and continuing ad nauseam, I have yet to see anything mentioned in the thread about 'Clapham attacks'. I was hoping this post would change the trajectory, but alas...
Yes, it does seem too have become a heaven sent opportunity for yet another thread about immigration.
Fab's favourite topic.
'bloody foreigners'.
When people are regularly being hurt, assaulted and killed them yeah I think people are well within their rights to question immigration and the lack of vetting.
Personally I have nothing against anyone who needs help but until a better,fairer and genuinely more robust system is in place to prevent people like this entering the country.
Do you think the countries that most of the people come from would put up with us should the situation be reversed??
It's sad that this happens and I feel people who are genuine need of help and assistance are being overlooked in favour of people (mainly single men) exploiting loopholes and knowing how to "play"the system.
I hate that we can't help all those who need help but I also hate people taking the piss out of this countries good nature and kindness.
Did you know 1300 people entered the country illegally in January of this year alone and that's the ones we know about!!
I worked in Harmonndsworth centre back in the early 90's
This has been going on for a very long time,I could go on for a long time regards the amount of assistance given from day one all at the UK tax payers expense.
Meanwhile we have record numbers of people sleeping rough and using food banks.
Something is very wrong with the current system,too many apologists jump to the defence of the criminal elements entering the UK under the guise of "asylum" and turn a blind eye to families unable to heat their homes or feed themselves.
You have to see it's possible to be concerned about the current situation with illegal immigrants and not deemed a racist A hole.
It's just common and economical sense to question why this is happening and how it can be made fairer, rather than just letting anyone in regardless.
The attack in question was sickening and if the man is found once he's been treated,them immediately deported to let the authorities of his home country deal with him.
I'm sorry if you all feel that this is a controversial opinion but I can't see how things are going to improve unless a line is drawn in the sand enough is enough.
Then once a better system is in place then allow people to enter via the proper channels and not encouraging organised crime syndicates to profit from people trafficking across hazardous seas.
You’re punishing all migrants for a problem caused by government, based upon the actions of a few (who wouldn’t have been able to harm anyone if the home office did their job correctly)
So how many deaths does it take then before it becomes serious?
1,10,100 maybe 1000 then perhaps we can say "oh yeah maybe we should have stopped them before this "
Now I don't know if you remember but about 7 years ago ISIS said as part of their jihad they where going to flood Europe with holy warriors.
Now OBVIOUSLY I'm not saying that they are all part of this,but from what I see Europe is being flooded with many thousands of men from that region whom we have no idea of their intentions.
Like I said more robust system in place to filter out the possibility of anyone with questionable motives entering the country."I agree we should have a robust asylum system - I’ve said that throughout this thread. What I’ve not said is “I think the time has come to stop all immigrants illegal or otherwise entering the UK” | |||
"Having scrolled through 'umpteen re-quoted passages beginning with "What the actual fuck is going on here??..." and continuing ad nauseam, I have yet to see anything mentioned in the thread about 'Clapham attacks'. I was hoping this post would change the trajectory, but alas...
Yes, it does seem too have become a heaven sent opportunity for yet another thread about immigration.
Fab's favourite topic.
'bloody foreigners'.
When people are regularly being hurt, assaulted and killed them yeah I think people are well within their rights to question immigration and the lack of vetting.
Personally I have nothing against anyone who needs help but until a better,fairer and genuinely more robust system is in place to prevent people like this entering the country.
Do you think the countries that most of the people come from would put up with us should the situation be reversed??
It's sad that this happens and I feel people who are genuine need of help and assistance are being overlooked in favour of people (mainly single men) exploiting loopholes and knowing how to "play"the system.
I hate that we can't help all those who need help but I also hate people taking the piss out of this countries good nature and kindness.
Did you know 1300 people entered the country illegally in January of this year alone and that's the ones we know about!!
I worked in Harmonndsworth centre back in the early 90's
This has been going on for a very long time,I could go on for a long time regards the amount of assistance given from day one all at the UK tax payers expense.
Meanwhile we have record numbers of people sleeping rough and using food banks.
Something is very wrong with the current system,too many apologists jump to the defence of the criminal elements entering the UK under the guise of "asylum" and turn a blind eye to families unable to heat their homes or feed themselves.
You have to see it's possible to be concerned about the current situation with illegal immigrants and not deemed a racist A hole.
It's just common and economical sense to question why this is happening and how it can be made fairer, rather than just letting anyone in regardless.
The attack in question was sickening and if the man is found once he's been treated,them immediately deported to let the authorities of his home country deal with him.
I'm sorry if you all feel that this is a controversial opinion but I can't see how things are going to improve unless a line is drawn in the sand enough is enough.
Then once a better system is in place then allow people to enter via the proper channels and not encouraging organised crime syndicates to profit from people trafficking across hazardous seas.
You’re punishing all migrants for a problem caused by government, based upon the actions of a few (who wouldn’t have been able to harm anyone if the home office did their job correctly)
So how many deaths does it take then before it becomes serious?
1,10,100 maybe 1000 then perhaps we can say "oh yeah maybe we should have stopped them before this "
Now I don't know if you remember but about 7 years ago ISIS said as part of their jihad they where going to flood Europe with holy warriors.
Now OBVIOUSLY I'm not saying that they are all part of this,but from what I see Europe is being flooded with many thousands of men from that region whom we have no idea of their intentions.
Like I said more robust system in place to filter out the possibility of anyone with questionable motives entering the country.
I agree we should have a robust asylum system - I’ve said that throughout this thread.
What I’ve not said is “I think the time has come to stop all immigrants illegal or otherwise entering the UK”"An asylum seeker from a war the UK started in Afghanistan, you could not make it up. | |||
"What the actual fuck is going on here?? This guy failed 2 asylum applications, was convicted of a sex crime, changed his religion to Christianity and claimed his life would be in danger if he returned to Afghanistan and was granted asylum on the third attempt. Tell me again that people don't know how to play our system. Who’s said that people don’t know how to play the system? We need a better system. A system where we deport after the first rejection would suffice. Maybe then he wouldn't have been able to commit crime in this country. If the checks done were correct, then deportation after a failed attempt would be suitable - there should be some sort of right to appeal (there is in every other walk of life), but that appeal could be fast-tracked or even undertaken after removal (And if the appeal is ‘won’ the citizen could return at home office expense)." I think the moment someone is convicted of a crime, there should be no option to appeal against deportation, especially crimes such as sexual assault. | |||
"An adequate asylum system would have a sort of holding system where the arrivals could live temporarily while their case goes through, plus an appeal (max 1 appeal). It would be a secure and safe area, where needs were met and safe living standards maintained. If asylum was granted then they’d move into the country legally, and if asylum failed, they’d remain on site until deportation was complete. This requires funding, good administration and government will. As far as I can tell, all three are missing. I don't disagree, except for the appeal, I think the system should be so simple to administer that the right to appeal is not an option. The problem with the accommodation, is there is no facility that could house them, and if we did build a town like facility I'm confident we would have protestors likening them to nazi camps There are plenty of facilities, the problem is 'good people' argue they aren't good enough. I guarantee they're better than a tent in calais. " Absobloodylutely | |||
| |||
| |||
"Having scrolled through 'umpteen re-quoted passages beginning with "What the actual fuck is going on here??..." and continuing ad nauseam, I have yet to see anything mentioned in the thread about 'Clapham attacks'. I was hoping this post would change the trajectory, but alas...
Yes, it does seem too have become a heaven sent opportunity for yet another thread about immigration.
Fab's favourite topic.
'bloody foreigners'.
When people are regularly being hurt, assaulted and killed them yeah I think people are well within their rights to question immigration and the lack of vetting.
Personally I have nothing against anyone who needs help but until a better,fairer and genuinely more robust system is in place to prevent people like this entering the country.
Do you think the countries that most of the people come from would put up with us should the situation be reversed??
It's sad that this happens and I feel people who are genuine need of help and assistance are being overlooked in favour of people (mainly single men) exploiting loopholes and knowing how to "play"the system.
I hate that we can't help all those who need help but I also hate people taking the piss out of this countries good nature and kindness.
Did you know 1300 people entered the country illegally in January of this year alone and that's the ones we know about!!
I worked in Harmonndsworth centre back in the early 90's
This has been going on for a very long time,I could go on for a long time regards the amount of assistance given from day one all at the UK tax payers expense.
Meanwhile we have record numbers of people sleeping rough and using food banks.
Something is very wrong with the current system,too many apologists jump to the defence of the criminal elements entering the UK under the guise of "asylum" and turn a blind eye to families unable to heat their homes or feed themselves.
You have to see it's possible to be concerned about the current situation with illegal immigrants and not deemed a racist A hole.
It's just common and economical sense to question why this is happening and how it can be made fairer, rather than just letting anyone in regardless.
The attack in question was sickening and if the man is found once he's been treated,them immediately deported to let the authorities of his home country deal with him.
I'm sorry if you all feel that this is a controversial opinion but I can't see how things are going to improve unless a line is drawn in the sand enough is enough.
Then once a better system is in place then allow people to enter via the proper channels and not encouraging organised crime syndicates to profit from people trafficking across hazardous seas.
You’re punishing all migrants for a problem caused by government, based upon the actions of a few (who wouldn’t have been able to harm anyone if the home office did their job correctly)
So how many deaths does it take then before it becomes serious?
1,10,100 maybe 1000 then perhaps we can say "oh yeah maybe we should have stopped them before this "
Now I don't know if you remember but about 7 years ago ISIS said as part of their jihad they where going to flood Europe with holy warriors.
Now OBVIOUSLY I'm not saying that they are all part of this,but from what I see Europe is being flooded with many thousands of men from that region whom we have no idea of their intentions.
Like I said more robust system in place to filter out the possibility of anyone with questionable motives entering the country.
I agree we should have a robust asylum system - I’ve said that throughout this thread.
What I’ve not said is “I think the time has come to stop all immigrants illegal or otherwise entering the UK”
An asylum seeker from a war the UK started in Afghanistan, you could not make it up.
"We did not start a war with Afghanistan. The US went to help the the country from being taken over by the talaban. I'm guessing their plan was to liberate the country and get rewarded in oil but it kind of backfired. Uk soldiers were sent in to assist the Americans as piece keepers. Technically the uk was never in direct war with Afghanistan | |||
| |||
"An adequate asylum system would have a sort of holding system where the arrivals could live temporarily while their case goes through, plus an appeal (max 1 appeal). It would be a secure and safe area, where needs were met and safe living standards maintained. If asylum was granted then they’d move into the country legally, and if asylum failed, they’d remain on site until deportation was complete. This requires funding, good administration and government will. As far as I can tell, all three are missing. " I think the MOD bases were a good idea, as they have facilities for medical centres, etc. The bases are good enough for our armed forces, they should be good enough for some immugrants. | |||
"Having scrolled through 'umpteen re-quoted passages beginning with "What the actual fuck is going on here??..." and continuing ad nauseam, I have yet to see anything mentioned in the thread about 'Clapham attacks'. I was hoping this post would change the trajectory, but alas...
Yes, it does seem too have become a heaven sent opportunity for yet another thread about immigration.
Fab's favourite topic.
'bloody foreigners'.
When people are regularly being hurt, assaulted and killed them yeah I think people are well within their rights to question immigration and the lack of vetting.
Personally I have nothing against anyone who needs help but until a better,fairer and genuinely more robust system is in place to prevent people like this entering the country.
Do you think the countries that most of the people come from would put up with us should the situation be reversed??
It's sad that this happens and I feel people who are genuine need of help and assistance are being overlooked in favour of people (mainly single men) exploiting loopholes and knowing how to "play"the system.
I hate that we can't help all those who need help but I also hate people taking the piss out of this countries good nature and kindness.
Did you know 1300 people entered the country illegally in January of this year alone and that's the ones we know about!!
I worked in Harmonndsworth centre back in the early 90's
This has been going on for a very long time,I could go on for a long time regards the amount of assistance given from day one all at the UK tax payers expense.
Meanwhile we have record numbers of people sleeping rough and using food banks.
Something is very wrong with the current system,too many apologists jump to the defence of the criminal elements entering the UK under the guise of "asylum" and turn a blind eye to families unable to heat their homes or feed themselves.
You have to see it's possible to be concerned about the current situation with illegal immigrants and not deemed a racist A hole.
It's just common and economical sense to question why this is happening and how it can be made fairer, rather than just letting anyone in regardless.
The attack in question was sickening and if the man is found once he's been treated,them immediately deported to let the authorities of his home country deal with him.
I'm sorry if you all feel that this is a controversial opinion but I can't see how things are going to improve unless a line is drawn in the sand enough is enough.
Then once a better system is in place then allow people to enter via the proper channels and not encouraging organised crime syndicates to profit from people trafficking across hazardous seas.
You’re punishing all migrants for a problem caused by government, based upon the actions of a few (who wouldn’t have been able to harm anyone if the home office did their job correctly)
So how many deaths does it take then before it becomes serious?
1,10,100 maybe 1000 then perhaps we can say "oh yeah maybe we should have stopped them before this "
Now I don't know if you remember but about 7 years ago ISIS said as part of their jihad they where going to flood Europe with holy warriors.
Now OBVIOUSLY I'm not saying that they are all part of this,but from what I see Europe is being flooded with many thousands of men from that region whom we have no idea of their intentions.
Like I said more robust system in place to filter out the possibility of anyone with questionable motives entering the country.
I agree we should have a robust asylum system - I’ve said that throughout this thread.
What I’ve not said is “I think the time has come to stop all immigrants illegal or otherwise entering the UK”
An asylum seeker from a war the UK started in Afghanistan, you could not make it up.
We did not start a war with Afghanistan. The US went to help the the country from being taken over by the talaban. I'm guessing their plan was to liberate the country and get rewarded in oil but it kind of backfired. Uk soldiers were sent in to assist the Americans as piece keepers. Technically the uk was never in direct war with Afghanistan "the country was being run by the taliban for years before we went there, only reason they went there was for bin laden and they knew he had left the country within a couple of months so no reason to be there for nearly 20 years, and reason we joined in because phony blair was americas bitch, that and his own vanity, the bell end wanted to be rememberd, and im pretty sure all those dead and injured british soilders would disagree with you about us not being in a war with afghanistan | |||
| |||
"Having scrolled through 'umpteen re-quoted passages beginning with "What the actual fuck is going on here??..." and continuing ad nauseam, I have yet to see anything mentioned in the thread about 'Clapham attacks'. I was hoping this post would change the trajectory, but alas...
Yes, it does seem too have become a heaven sent opportunity for yet another thread about immigration.
Fab's favourite topic.
'bloody foreigners'.
When people are regularly being hurt, assaulted and killed them yeah I think people are well within their rights to question immigration and the lack of vetting.
Personally I have nothing against anyone who needs help but until a better,fairer and genuinely more robust system is in place to prevent people like this entering the country.
Do you think the countries that most of the people come from would put up with us should the situation be reversed??
It's sad that this happens and I feel people who are genuine need of help and assistance are being overlooked in favour of people (mainly single men) exploiting loopholes and knowing how to "play"the system.
I hate that we can't help all those who need help but I also hate people taking the piss out of this countries good nature and kindness.
Did you know 1300 people entered the country illegally in January of this year alone and that's the ones we know about!!
I worked in Harmonndsworth centre back in the early 90's
This has been going on for a very long time,I could go on for a long time regards the amount of assistance given from day one all at the UK tax payers expense.
Meanwhile we have record numbers of people sleeping rough and using food banks.
Something is very wrong with the current system,too many apologists jump to the defence of the criminal elements entering the UK under the guise of "asylum" and turn a blind eye to families unable to heat their homes or feed themselves.
You have to see it's possible to be concerned about the current situation with illegal immigrants and not deemed a racist A hole.
It's just common and economical sense to question why this is happening and how it can be made fairer, rather than just letting anyone in regardless.
The attack in question was sickening and if the man is found once he's been treated,them immediately deported to let the authorities of his home country deal with him.
I'm sorry if you all feel that this is a controversial opinion but I can't see how things are going to improve unless a line is drawn in the sand enough is enough.
Then once a better system is in place then allow people to enter via the proper channels and not encouraging organised crime syndicates to profit from people trafficking across hazardous seas.
You’re punishing all migrants for a problem caused by government, based upon the actions of a few (who wouldn’t have been able to harm anyone if the home office did their job correctly)
So how many deaths does it take then before it becomes serious?
1,10,100 maybe 1000 then perhaps we can say "oh yeah maybe we should have stopped them before this "
Now I don't know if you remember but about 7 years ago ISIS said as part of their jihad they where going to flood Europe with holy warriors.
Now OBVIOUSLY I'm not saying that they are all part of this,but from what I see Europe is being flooded with many thousands of men from that region whom we have no idea of their intentions.
Like I said more robust system in place to filter out the possibility of anyone with questionable motives entering the country.
I agree we should have a robust asylum system - I’ve said that throughout this thread.
What I’ve not said is “I think the time has come to stop all immigrants illegal or otherwise entering the UK”
An asylum seeker from a war the UK started in Afghanistan, you could not make it up.
We did not start a war with Afghanistan. The US went to help the the country from being taken over by the talaban. I'm guessing their plan was to liberate the country and get rewarded in oil but it kind of backfired. Uk soldiers were sent in to assist the Americans as piece keepers. Technically the uk was never in direct war with Afghanistan the country was being run by the taliban for years before we went there, only reason they went there was for bin laden and they knew he had left the country within a couple of months so no reason to be there for nearly 20 years, and reason we joined in because phony blair was americas bitch, that and his own vanity, the bell end wanted to be rememberd, and im pretty sure all those dead and injured british soilders would disagree with you about us not being in a war with afghanistan"I see this is still mainly about the Clapham story. | |||
"Having scrolled through 'umpteen re-quoted passages beginning with "What the actual fuck is going on here??..." and continuing ad nauseam, I have yet to see anything mentioned in the thread about 'Clapham attacks'. I was hoping this post would change the trajectory, but alas...
Yes, it does seem too have become a heaven sent opportunity for yet another thread about immigration.
Fab's favourite topic.
'bloody foreigners'.
When people are regularly being hurt, assaulted and killed them yeah I think people are well within their rights to question immigration and the lack of vetting.
Personally I have nothing against anyone who needs help but until a better,fairer and genuinely more robust system is in place to prevent people like this entering the country.
Do you think the countries that most of the people come from would put up with us should the situation be reversed??
It's sad that this happens and I feel people who are genuine need of help and assistance are being overlooked in favour of people (mainly single men) exploiting loopholes and knowing how to "play"the system.
I hate that we can't help all those who need help but I also hate people taking the piss out of this countries good nature and kindness.
Did you know 1300 people entered the country illegally in January of this year alone and that's the ones we know about!!
I worked in Harmonndsworth centre back in the early 90's
This has been going on for a very long time,I could go on for a long time regards the amount of assistance given from day one all at the UK tax payers expense.
Meanwhile we have record numbers of people sleeping rough and using food banks.
Something is very wrong with the current system,too many apologists jump to the defence of the criminal elements entering the UK under the guise of "asylum" and turn a blind eye to families unable to heat their homes or feed themselves.
You have to see it's possible to be concerned about the current situation with illegal immigrants and not deemed a racist A hole.
It's just common and economical sense to question why this is happening and how it can be made fairer, rather than just letting anyone in regardless.
The attack in question was sickening and if the man is found once he's been treated,them immediately deported to let the authorities of his home country deal with him.
I'm sorry if you all feel that this is a controversial opinion but I can't see how things are going to improve unless a line is drawn in the sand enough is enough.
Then once a better system is in place then allow people to enter via the proper channels and not encouraging organised crime syndicates to profit from people trafficking across hazardous seas.
You’re punishing all migrants for a problem caused by government, based upon the actions of a few (who wouldn’t have been able to harm anyone if the home office did their job correctly)
So how many deaths does it take then before it becomes serious?
1,10,100 maybe 1000 then perhaps we can say "oh yeah maybe we should have stopped them before this "
Now I don't know if you remember but about 7 years ago ISIS said as part of their jihad they where going to flood Europe with holy warriors.
Now OBVIOUSLY I'm not saying that they are all part of this,but from what I see Europe is being flooded with many thousands of men from that region whom we have no idea of their intentions.
Like I said more robust system in place to filter out the possibility of anyone with questionable motives entering the country.
I agree we should have a robust asylum system - I’ve said that throughout this thread.
What I’ve not said is “I think the time has come to stop all immigrants illegal or otherwise entering the UK”
An asylum seeker from a war the UK started in Afghanistan, you could not make it up.
We did not start a war with Afghanistan. The US went to help the the country from being taken over by the talaban. I'm guessing their plan was to liberate the country and get rewarded in oil but it kind of backfired. Uk soldiers were sent in to assist the Americans as piece keepers. Technically the uk was never in direct war with Afghanistan the country was being run by the taliban for years before we went there, only reason they went there was for bin laden and they knew he had left the country within a couple of months so no reason to be there for nearly 20 years, and reason we joined in because phony blair was americas bitch, that and his own vanity, the bell end wanted to be rememberd, and im pretty sure all those dead and injured british soilders would disagree with you about us not being in a war with afghanistan
I see this is still mainly about the Clapham story."People don't care about what happened in Clapham, they just want to rant about immigrants. | |||
"Having scrolled through 'umpteen re-quoted passages beginning with "What the actual fuck is going on here??..." and continuing ad nauseam, I have yet to see anything mentioned in the thread about 'Clapham attacks'. I was hoping this post would change the trajectory, but alas...
Yes, it does seem too have become a heaven sent opportunity for yet another thread about immigration.
Fab's favourite topic.
'bloody foreigners'.
When people are regularly being hurt, assaulted and killed them yeah I think people are well within their rights to question immigration and the lack of vetting.
Personally I have nothing against anyone who needs help but until a better,fairer and genuinely more robust system is in place to prevent people like this entering the country.
Do you think the countries that most of the people come from would put up with us should the situation be reversed??
It's sad that this happens and I feel people who are genuine need of help and assistance are being overlooked in favour of people (mainly single men) exploiting loopholes and knowing how to "play"the system.
I hate that we can't help all those who need help but I also hate people taking the piss out of this countries good nature and kindness.
Did you know 1300 people entered the country illegally in January of this year alone and that's the ones we know about!!
I worked in Harmonndsworth centre back in the early 90's
This has been going on for a very long time,I could go on for a long time regards the amount of assistance given from day one all at the UK tax payers expense.
Meanwhile we have record numbers of people sleeping rough and using food banks.
Something is very wrong with the current system,too many apologists jump to the defence of the criminal elements entering the UK under the guise of "asylum" and turn a blind eye to families unable to heat their homes or feed themselves.
You have to see it's possible to be concerned about the current situation with illegal immigrants and not deemed a racist A hole.
It's just common and economical sense to question why this is happening and how it can be made fairer, rather than just letting anyone in regardless.
The attack in question was sickening and if the man is found once he's been treated,them immediately deported to let the authorities of his home country deal with him.
I'm sorry if you all feel that this is a controversial opinion but I can't see how things are going to improve unless a line is drawn in the sand enough is enough.
Then once a better system is in place then allow people to enter via the proper channels and not encouraging organised crime syndicates to profit from people trafficking across hazardous seas.
You’re punishing all migrants for a problem caused by government, based upon the actions of a few (who wouldn’t have been able to harm anyone if the home office did their job correctly)
So how many deaths does it take then before it becomes serious?
1,10,100 maybe 1000 then perhaps we can say "oh yeah maybe we should have stopped them before this "
Now I don't know if you remember but about 7 years ago ISIS said as part of their jihad they where going to flood Europe with holy warriors.
Now OBVIOUSLY I'm not saying that they are all part of this,but from what I see Europe is being flooded with many thousands of men from that region whom we have no idea of their intentions.
Like I said more robust system in place to filter out the possibility of anyone with questionable motives entering the country.
I agree we should have a robust asylum system - I’ve said that throughout this thread.
What I’ve not said is “I think the time has come to stop all immigrants illegal or otherwise entering the UK”
An asylum seeker from a war the UK started in Afghanistan, you could not make it up.
We did not start a war with Afghanistan. The US went to help the the country from being taken over by the talaban. I'm guessing their plan was to liberate the country and get rewarded in oil but it kind of backfired. Uk soldiers were sent in to assist the Americans as piece keepers. Technically the uk was never in direct war with Afghanistan the country was being run by the taliban for years before we went there, only reason they went there was for bin laden and they knew he had left the country within a couple of months so no reason to be there for nearly 20 years, and reason we joined in because phony blair was americas bitch, that and his own vanity, the bell end wanted to be rememberd, and im pretty sure all those dead and injured british soilders would disagree with you about us not being in a war with afghanistan
I see this is still mainly about the Clapham story.
People don't care about what happened in Clapham, they just want to rant about immigrants."The issue here is more people want to talk about the failings that allowed the attack to happen. That is human nature trust, always has been, let a stranger into the tribe and when they turn out to be bad the people no longer want strangers allowed into the tribe. You seem to be at odds with that instinct. | |||
"Having scrolled through 'umpteen re-quoted passages beginning with "What the actual fuck is going on here??..." and continuing ad nauseam, I have yet to see anything mentioned in the thread about 'Clapham attacks'. I was hoping this post would change the trajectory, but alas...
Yes, it does seem too have become a heaven sent opportunity for yet another thread about immigration.
Fab's favourite topic.
'bloody foreigners'.
When people are regularly being hurt, assaulted and killed them yeah I think people are well within their rights to question immigration and the lack of vetting.
Personally I have nothing against anyone who needs help but until a better,fairer and genuinely more robust system is in place to prevent people like this entering the country.
Do you think the countries that most of the people come from would put up with us should the situation be reversed??
It's sad that this happens and I feel people who are genuine need of help and assistance are being overlooked in favour of people (mainly single men) exploiting loopholes and knowing how to "play"the system.
I hate that we can't help all those who need help but I also hate people taking the piss out of this countries good nature and kindness.
Did you know 1300 people entered the country illegally in January of this year alone and that's the ones we know about!!
I worked in Harmonndsworth centre back in the early 90's
This has been going on for a very long time,I could go on for a long time regards the amount of assistance given from day one all at the UK tax payers expense.
Meanwhile we have record numbers of people sleeping rough and using food banks.
Something is very wrong with the current system,too many apologists jump to the defence of the criminal elements entering the UK under the guise of "asylum" and turn a blind eye to families unable to heat their homes or feed themselves.
You have to see it's possible to be concerned about the current situation with illegal immigrants and not deemed a racist A hole.
It's just common and economical sense to question why this is happening and how it can be made fairer, rather than just letting anyone in regardless.
The attack in question was sickening and if the man is found once he's been treated,them immediately deported to let the authorities of his home country deal with him.
I'm sorry if you all feel that this is a controversial opinion but I can't see how things are going to improve unless a line is drawn in the sand enough is enough.
Then once a better system is in place then allow people to enter via the proper channels and not encouraging organised crime syndicates to profit from people trafficking across hazardous seas.
You’re punishing all migrants for a problem caused by government, based upon the actions of a few (who wouldn’t have been able to harm anyone if the home office did their job correctly)
So how many deaths does it take then before it becomes serious?
1,10,100 maybe 1000 then perhaps we can say "oh yeah maybe we should have stopped them before this "
Now I don't know if you remember but about 7 years ago ISIS said as part of their jihad they where going to flood Europe with holy warriors.
Now OBVIOUSLY I'm not saying that they are all part of this,but from what I see Europe is being flooded with many thousands of men from that region whom we have no idea of their intentions.
Like I said more robust system in place to filter out the possibility of anyone with questionable motives entering the country.
I agree we should have a robust asylum system - I’ve said that throughout this thread.
What I’ve not said is “I think the time has come to stop all immigrants illegal or otherwise entering the UK”
An asylum seeker from a war the UK started in Afghanistan, you could not make it up.
We did not start a war with Afghanistan. The US went to help the the country from being taken over by the talaban. I'm guessing their plan was to liberate the country and get rewarded in oil but it kind of backfired. Uk soldiers were sent in to assist the Americans as piece keepers. Technically the uk was never in direct war with Afghanistan the country was being run by the taliban for years before we went there, only reason they went there was for bin laden and they knew he had left the country within a couple of months so no reason to be there for nearly 20 years, and reason we joined in because phony blair was americas bitch, that and his own vanity, the bell end wanted to be rememberd, and im pretty sure all those dead and injured british soilders would disagree with you about us not being in a war with afghanistan
I see this is still mainly about the Clapham story.
People don't care about what happened in Clapham, they just want to rant about immigrants."Did he attack other ‘immigrants’ if so that might temper their outrage | |||
| |||
"Immigration is a con a massive con. Immigration is something this country needs, it has allowed to go out of control. To stop immigration it has been mentioned many times in history, the cash every country spends on immigrants should be used to keep these asylum seekers in their own countries. Using this cash to educate, build infrastructure improving their life chances within their own boarders, so providing less reasons to leave." Uk was once a global power, by 1920 the uk held territories covering a quarter of the Earth's total land area and controlled 412 million people. Uk has fought wars in 171 of the globes 195 countries and territories Look what has changed in only 100 years, now climate change and conflict is anticipated by the UN to displace another 1.2bn people. 2 million currently in Gaza needing new homes. In another 100 years the ethnicities in western countries are likely to be vastly changed from today, birth rates are higher in some ethnicities, without the added impact of immigration to expand minorities. | |||
"Having scrolled through 'umpteen re-quoted passages beginning with "What the actual fuck is going on here??..." and continuing ad nauseam, I have yet to see anything mentioned in the thread about 'Clapham attacks'. I was hoping this post would change the trajectory, but alas...
Yes, it does seem too have become a heaven sent opportunity for yet another thread about immigration.
Fab's favourite topic.
'bloody foreigners'.
When people are regularly being hurt, assaulted and killed them yeah I think people are well within their rights to question immigration and the lack of vetting.
Personally I have nothing against anyone who needs help but until a better,fairer and genuinely more robust system is in place to prevent people like this entering the country.
Do you think the countries that most of the people come from would put up with us should the situation be reversed??
It's sad that this happens and I feel people who are genuine need of help and assistance are being overlooked in favour of people (mainly single men) exploiting loopholes and knowing how to "play"the system.
I hate that we can't help all those who need help but I also hate people taking the piss out of this countries good nature and kindness.
Did you know 1300 people entered the country illegally in January of this year alone and that's the ones we know about!!
I worked in Harmonndsworth centre back in the early 90's
This has been going on for a very long time,I could go on for a long time regards the amount of assistance given from day one all at the UK tax payers expense.
Meanwhile we have record numbers of people sleeping rough and using food banks.
Something is very wrong with the current system,too many apologists jump to the defence of the criminal elements entering the UK under the guise of "asylum" and turn a blind eye to families unable to heat their homes or feed themselves.
You have to see it's possible to be concerned about the current situation with illegal immigrants and not deemed a racist A hole.
It's just common and economical sense to question why this is happening and how it can be made fairer, rather than just letting anyone in regardless.
The attack in question was sickening and if the man is found once he's been treated,them immediately deported to let the authorities of his home country deal with him.
I'm sorry if you all feel that this is a controversial opinion but I can't see how things are going to improve unless a line is drawn in the sand enough is enough.
Then once a better system is in place then allow people to enter via the proper channels and not encouraging organised crime syndicates to profit from people trafficking across hazardous seas.
You’re punishing all migrants for a problem caused by government, based upon the actions of a few (who wouldn’t have been able to harm anyone if the home office did their job correctly)
So how many deaths does it take then before it becomes serious?
1,10,100 maybe 1000 then perhaps we can say "oh yeah maybe we should have stopped them before this "
Now I don't know if you remember but about 7 years ago ISIS said as part of their jihad they where going to flood Europe with holy warriors.
Now OBVIOUSLY I'm not saying that they are all part of this,but from what I see Europe is being flooded with many thousands of men from that region whom we have no idea of their intentions.
Like I said more robust system in place to filter out the possibility of anyone with questionable motives entering the country.
I agree we should have a robust asylum system - I’ve said that throughout this thread.
What I’ve not said is “I think the time has come to stop all immigrants illegal or otherwise entering the UK”
An asylum seeker from a war the UK started in Afghanistan, you could not make it up.
We did not start a war with Afghanistan. The US went to help the the country from being taken over by the talaban. I'm guessing their plan was to liberate the country and get rewarded in oil but it kind of backfired. Uk soldiers were sent in to assist the Americans as piece keepers. Technically the uk was never in direct war with Afghanistan the country was being run by the taliban for years before we went there, only reason they went there was for bin laden and they knew he had left the country within a couple of months so no reason to be there for nearly 20 years, and reason we joined in because phony blair was americas bitch, that and his own vanity, the bell end wanted to be rememberd, and im pretty sure all those dead and injured british soilders would disagree with you about us not being in a war with afghanistan
I see this is still mainly about the Clapham story.
People don't care about what happened in Clapham, they just want to rant about immigrants.
The issue here is more people want to talk about the failings that allowed the attack to happen.
That is human nature trust, always has been, let a stranger into the tribe and when they turn out to be bad the people no longer want strangers allowed into the tribe.
You seem to be at odds with that instinct."Yeah that's what I said, in less words. People just want to rant about immigrants. | |||
"Having scrolled through 'umpteen re-quoted passages beginning with "What the actual fuck is going on here??..." and continuing ad nauseam, I have yet to see anything mentioned in the thread about 'Clapham attacks'. I was hoping this post would change the trajectory, but alas...
Yes, it does seem too have become a heaven sent opportunity for yet another thread about immigration.
Fab's favourite topic.
'bloody foreigners'.
When people are regularly being hurt, assaulted and killed them yeah I think people are well within their rights to question immigration and the lack of vetting.
Personally I have nothing against anyone who needs help but until a better,fairer and genuinely more robust system is in place to prevent people like this entering the country.
Do you think the countries that most of the people come from would put up with us should the situation be reversed??
It's sad that this happens and I feel people who are genuine need of help and assistance are being overlooked in favour of people (mainly single men) exploiting loopholes and knowing how to "play"the system.
I hate that we can't help all those who need help but I also hate people taking the piss out of this countries good nature and kindness.
Did you know 1300 people entered the country illegally in January of this year alone and that's the ones we know about!!
I worked in Harmonndsworth centre back in the early 90's
This has been going on for a very long time,I could go on for a long time regards the amount of assistance given from day one all at the UK tax payers expense.
Meanwhile we have record numbers of people sleeping rough and using food banks.
Something is very wrong with the current system,too many apologists jump to the defence of the criminal elements entering the UK under the guise of "asylum" and turn a blind eye to families unable to heat their homes or feed themselves.
You have to see it's possible to be concerned about the current situation with illegal immigrants and not deemed a racist A hole.
It's just common and economical sense to question why this is happening and how it can be made fairer, rather than just letting anyone in regardless.
The attack in question was sickening and if the man is found once he's been treated,them immediately deported to let the authorities of his home country deal with him.
I'm sorry if you all feel that this is a controversial opinion but I can't see how things are going to improve unless a line is drawn in the sand enough is enough.
Then once a better system is in place then allow people to enter via the proper channels and not encouraging organised crime syndicates to profit from people trafficking across hazardous seas.
You’re punishing all migrants for a problem caused by government, based upon the actions of a few (who wouldn’t have been able to harm anyone if the home office did their job correctly)
So how many deaths does it take then before it becomes serious?
1,10,100 maybe 1000 then perhaps we can say "oh yeah maybe we should have stopped them before this "
Now I don't know if you remember but about 7 years ago ISIS said as part of their jihad they where going to flood Europe with holy warriors.
Now OBVIOUSLY I'm not saying that they are all part of this,but from what I see Europe is being flooded with many thousands of men from that region whom we have no idea of their intentions.
Like I said more robust system in place to filter out the possibility of anyone with questionable motives entering the country.
I agree we should have a robust asylum system - I’ve said that throughout this thread.
What I’ve not said is “I think the time has come to stop all immigrants illegal or otherwise entering the UK”
An asylum seeker from a war the UK started in Afghanistan, you could not make it up.
We did not start a war with Afghanistan. The US went to help the the country from being taken over by the talaban. I'm guessing their plan was to liberate the country and get rewarded in oil but it kind of backfired. Uk soldiers were sent in to assist the Americans as piece keepers. Technically the uk was never in direct war with Afghanistan the country was being run by the taliban for years before we went there, only reason they went there was for bin laden and they knew he had left the country within a couple of months so no reason to be there for nearly 20 years, and reason we joined in because phony blair was americas bitch, that and his own vanity, the bell end wanted to be rememberd, and im pretty sure all those dead and injured british soilders would disagree with you about us not being in a war with afghanistan
I see this is still mainly about the Clapham story.
People don't care about what happened in Clapham, they just want to rant about immigrants.
The issue here is more people want to talk about the failings that allowed the attack to happen.
That is human nature trust, always has been, let a stranger into the tribe and when they turn out to be bad the people no longer want strangers allowed into the tribe.
You seem to be at odds with that instinct.
Yeah that's what I said, in less words.
People just want to rant about immigrants. "Mostly they are not, they are questioning how the system is so bad it allowed an illegal immigrant, he had been refused entry into the country to stay here and during that time he committed a sexual offence, was convicted and still managed to claim asylum on the 3 rd attempt 6 - 8 years later. The system should have been strong enough for him to be removed at the first failure, and because it wasn't we now have a woman and children suffering from being attacked with acid. People should be concerned that there is a strong possibility that other people with equally unsavoury appetites for violence and crime are being allowed to wander the streets unchecked, attempting to gain asylum over numbers of years. | |||
"Having scrolled through 'umpteen re-quoted passages beginning with "What the actual fuck is going on here??..." and continuing ad nauseam, I have yet to see anything mentioned in the thread about 'Clapham attacks'. I was hoping this post would change the trajectory, but alas...
Yes, it does seem too have become a heaven sent opportunity for yet another thread about immigration.
Fab's favourite topic.
'bloody foreigners'.
When people are regularly being hurt, assaulted and killed them yeah I think people are well within their rights to question immigration and the lack of vetting.
Personally I have nothing against anyone who needs help but until a better,fairer and genuinely more robust system is in place to prevent people like this entering the country.
Do you think the countries that most of the people come from would put up with us should the situation be reversed??
It's sad that this happens and I feel people who are genuine need of help and assistance are being overlooked in favour of people (mainly single men) exploiting loopholes and knowing how to "play"the system.
I hate that we can't help all those who need help but I also hate people taking the piss out of this countries good nature and kindness.
Did you know 1300 people entered the country illegally in January of this year alone and that's the ones we know about!!
I worked in Harmonndsworth centre back in the early 90's
This has been going on for a very long time,I could go on for a long time regards the amount of assistance given from day one all at the UK tax payers expense.
Meanwhile we have record numbers of people sleeping rough and using food banks.
Something is very wrong with the current system,too many apologists jump to the defence of the criminal elements entering the UK under the guise of "asylum" and turn a blind eye to families unable to heat their homes or feed themselves.
You have to see it's possible to be concerned about the current situation with illegal immigrants and not deemed a racist A hole.
It's just common and economical sense to question why this is happening and how it can be made fairer, rather than just letting anyone in regardless.
The attack in question was sickening and if the man is found once he's been treated,them immediately deported to let the authorities of his home country deal with him.
I'm sorry if you all feel that this is a controversial opinion but I can't see how things are going to improve unless a line is drawn in the sand enough is enough.
Then once a better system is in place then allow people to enter via the proper channels and not encouraging organised crime syndicates to profit from people trafficking across hazardous seas.
You’re punishing all migrants for a problem caused by government, based upon the actions of a few (who wouldn’t have been able to harm anyone if the home office did their job correctly)
So how many deaths does it take then before it becomes serious?
1,10,100 maybe 1000 then perhaps we can say "oh yeah maybe we should have stopped them before this "
Now I don't know if you remember but about 7 years ago ISIS said as part of their jihad they where going to flood Europe with holy warriors.
Now OBVIOUSLY I'm not saying that they are all part of this,but from what I see Europe is being flooded with many thousands of men from that region whom we have no idea of their intentions.
Like I said more robust system in place to filter out the possibility of anyone with questionable motives entering the country.
I agree we should have a robust asylum system - I’ve said that throughout this thread.
What I’ve not said is “I think the time has come to stop all immigrants illegal or otherwise entering the UK”
An asylum seeker from a war the UK started in Afghanistan, you could not make it up.
We did not start a war with Afghanistan. The US went to help the the country from being taken over by the talaban. I'm guessing their plan was to liberate the country and get rewarded in oil but it kind of backfired. Uk soldiers were sent in to assist the Americans as piece keepers. Technically the uk was never in direct war with Afghanistan the country was being run by the taliban for years before we went there, only reason they went there was for bin laden and they knew he had left the country within a couple of months so no reason to be there for nearly 20 years, and reason we joined in because phony blair was americas bitch, that and his own vanity, the bell end wanted to be rememberd, and im pretty sure all those dead and injured british soilders would disagree with you about us not being in a war with afghanistan
I see this is still mainly about the Clapham story.
People don't care about what happened in Clapham, they just want to rant about immigrants.
The issue here is more people want to talk about the failings that allowed the attack to happen.
That is human nature trust, always has been, let a stranger into the tribe and when they turn out to be bad the people no longer want strangers allowed into the tribe.
You seem to be at odds with that instinct.
Yeah that's what I said, in less words.
People just want to rant about immigrants.
Mostly they are not, they are questioning how the system is so bad it allowed an illegal immigrant, he had been refused entry into the country to stay here and during that time he committed a sexual offence, was convicted and still managed to claim asylum on the 3 rd attempt 6 - 8 years later.
The system should have been strong enough for him to be removed at the first failure, and because it wasn't we now have a woman and children suffering from being attacked with acid.
People should be concerned that there is a strong possibility that other people with equally unsavoury appetites for violence and crime are being allowed to wander the streets unchecked, attempting to gain asylum over numbers of years. "there's definitely some good journalism to be done on how many committed crimes while getting a decision made. I'm also uncomfortable with a claim being successful because of a change that happened while in the UK. | |||
" People should be concerned that there is a strong possibility that other people with equally unsavoury appetites for violence and crime are being allowed to wander the streets unchecked, attempting to gain asylum over numbers of years. " People should be concerned about anyone with clearly such a broken mind that would perform such an unsavoury act of violence, whether asylum seeker or born and bred in the U.K. | |||
"Having scrolled through 'umpteen re-quoted passages beginning with "What the actual fuck is going on here??..." and continuing ad nauseam, I have yet to see anything mentioned in the thread about 'Clapham attacks'. I was hoping this post would change the trajectory, but alas...
Yes, it does seem too have become a heaven sent opportunity for yet another thread about immigration.
Fab's favourite topic.
'bloody foreigners'.
When people are regularly being hurt, assaulted and killed them yeah I think people are well within their rights to question immigration and the lack of vetting.
Personally I have nothing against anyone who needs help but until a better,fairer and genuinely more robust system is in place to prevent people like this entering the country.
Do you think the countries that most of the people come from would put up with us should the situation be reversed??
It's sad that this happens and I feel people who are genuine need of help and assistance are being overlooked in favour of people (mainly single men) exploiting loopholes and knowing how to "play"the system.
I hate that we can't help all those who need help but I also hate people taking the piss out of this countries good nature and kindness.
Did you know 1300 people entered the country illegally in January of this year alone and that's the ones we know about!!
I worked in Harmonndsworth centre back in the early 90's
This has been going on for a very long time,I could go on for a long time regards the amount of assistance given from day one all at the UK tax payers expense.
Meanwhile we have record numbers of people sleeping rough and using food banks.
Something is very wrong with the current system,too many apologists jump to the defence of the criminal elements entering the UK under the guise of "asylum" and turn a blind eye to families unable to heat their homes or feed themselves.
You have to see it's possible to be concerned about the current situation with illegal immigrants and not deemed a racist A hole.
It's just common and economical sense to question why this is happening and how it can be made fairer, rather than just letting anyone in regardless.
The attack in question was sickening and if the man is found once he's been treated,them immediately deported to let the authorities of his home country deal with him.
I'm sorry if you all feel that this is a controversial opinion but I can't see how things are going to improve unless a line is drawn in the sand enough is enough.
Then once a better system is in place then allow people to enter via the proper channels and not encouraging organised crime syndicates to profit from people trafficking across hazardous seas.
You’re punishing all migrants for a problem caused by government, based upon the actions of a few (who wouldn’t have been able to harm anyone if the home office did their job correctly)
So how many deaths does it take then before it becomes serious?
1,10,100 maybe 1000 then perhaps we can say "oh yeah maybe we should have stopped them before this "
Now I don't know if you remember but about 7 years ago ISIS said as part of their jihad they where going to flood Europe with holy warriors.
Now OBVIOUSLY I'm not saying that they are all part of this,but from what I see Europe is being flooded with many thousands of men from that region whom we have no idea of their intentions.
Like I said more robust system in place to filter out the possibility of anyone with questionable motives entering the country.
I agree we should have a robust asylum system - I’ve said that throughout this thread.
What I’ve not said is “I think the time has come to stop all immigrants illegal or otherwise entering the UK”
An asylum seeker from a war the UK started in Afghanistan, you could not make it up.
We did not start a war with Afghanistan. The US went to help the the country from being taken over by the talaban. I'm guessing their plan was to liberate the country and get rewarded in oil but it kind of backfired. Uk soldiers were sent in to assist the Americans as piece keepers. Technically the uk was never in direct war with Afghanistan the country was being run by the taliban for years before we went there, only reason they went there was for bin laden and they knew he had left the country within a couple of months so no reason to be there for nearly 20 years, and reason we joined in because phony blair was americas bitch, that and his own vanity, the bell end wanted to be rememberd, and im pretty sure all those dead and injured british soilders would disagree with you about us not being in a war with afghanistan
I see this is still mainly about the Clapham story.
People don't care about what happened in Clapham, they just want to rant about immigrants.
Did he attack other ‘immigrants’ if so that might temper their outrage "He was in a relationship with the woman he attacked. Her details or name have not yet been released. | |||
"Having scrolled through 'umpteen re-quoted passages beginning with "What the actual fuck is going on here??..." and continuing ad nauseam, I have yet to see anything mentioned in the thread about 'Clapham attacks'. I was hoping this post would change the trajectory, but alas...
Yes, it does seem too have become a heaven sent opportunity for yet another thread about immigration.
Fab's favourite topic.
'bloody foreigners'.
When people are regularly being hurt, assaulted and killed them yeah I think people are well within their rights to question immigration and the lack of vetting.
Personally I have nothing against anyone who needs help but until a better,fairer and genuinely more robust system is in place to prevent people like this entering the country.
Do you think the countries that most of the people come from would put up with us should the situation be reversed??
It's sad that this happens and I feel people who are genuine need of help and assistance are being overlooked in favour of people (mainly single men) exploiting loopholes and knowing how to "play"the system.
I hate that we can't help all those who need help but I also hate people taking the piss out of this countries good nature and kindness.
Did you know 1300 people entered the country illegally in January of this year alone and that's the ones we know about!!
I worked in Harmonndsworth centre back in the early 90's
This has been going on for a very long time,I could go on for a long time regards the amount of assistance given from day one all at the UK tax payers expense.
Meanwhile we have record numbers of people sleeping rough and using food banks.
Something is very wrong with the current system,too many apologists jump to the defence of the criminal elements entering the UK under the guise of "asylum" and turn a blind eye to families unable to heat their homes or feed themselves.
You have to see it's possible to be concerned about the current situation with illegal immigrants and not deemed a racist A hole.
It's just common and economical sense to question why this is happening and how it can be made fairer, rather than just letting anyone in regardless.
The attack in question was sickening and if the man is found once he's been treated,them immediately deported to let the authorities of his home country deal with him.
I'm sorry if you all feel that this is a controversial opinion but I can't see how things are going to improve unless a line is drawn in the sand enough is enough.
Then once a better system is in place then allow people to enter via the proper channels and not encouraging organised crime syndicates to profit from people trafficking across hazardous seas.
You’re punishing all migrants for a problem caused by government, based upon the actions of a few (who wouldn’t have been able to harm anyone if the home office did their job correctly)
So how many deaths does it take then before it becomes serious?
1,10,100 maybe 1000 then perhaps we can say "oh yeah maybe we should have stopped them before this "
Now I don't know if you remember but about 7 years ago ISIS said as part of their jihad they where going to flood Europe with holy warriors.
Now OBVIOUSLY I'm not saying that they are all part of this,but from what I see Europe is being flooded with many thousands of men from that region whom we have no idea of their intentions.
Like I said more robust system in place to filter out the possibility of anyone with questionable motives entering the country.
I agree we should have a robust asylum system - I’ve said that throughout this thread.
What I’ve not said is “I think the time has come to stop all immigrants illegal or otherwise entering the UK”
An asylum seeker from a war the UK started in Afghanistan, you could not make it up.
We did not start a war with Afghanistan. The US went to help the the country from being taken over by the talaban. I'm guessing their plan was to liberate the country and get rewarded in oil but it kind of backfired. Uk soldiers were sent in to assist the Americans as piece keepers. Technically the uk was never in direct war with Afghanistan the country was being run by the taliban for years before we went there, only reason they went there was for bin laden and they knew he had left the country within a couple of months so no reason to be there for nearly 20 years, and reason we joined in because phony blair was americas bitch, that and his own vanity, the bell end wanted to be rememberd, and im pretty sure all those dead and injured british soilders would disagree with you about us not being in a war with afghanistan
I see this is still mainly about the Clapham story.
People don't care about what happened in Clapham, they just want to rant about immigrants.
The issue here is more people want to talk about the failings that allowed the attack to happen.
That is human nature trust, always has been, let a stranger into the tribe and when they turn out to be bad the people no longer want strangers allowed into the tribe.
You seem to be at odds with that instinct.
Yeah that's what I said, in less words.
People just want to rant about immigrants.
Mostly they are not, they are questioning how the system is so bad it allowed an illegal immigrant, he had been refused entry into the country to stay here and during that time he committed a sexual offence, was convicted and still managed to claim asylum on the 3 rd attempt 6 - 8 years later.
The system should have been strong enough for him to be removed at the first failure, and because it wasn't we now have a woman and children suffering from being attacked with acid.
People should be concerned that there is a strong possibility that other people with equally unsavoury appetites for violence and crime are being allowed to wander the streets unchecked, attempting to gain asylum over numbers of years. "Are these people equally concerned when a non-immigrant commits a similar crime? I'd say not, or if they are, they keep it to themselves. Hence, they just want to rant about immigrants. | |||
" People should be concerned that there is a strong possibility that other people with equally unsavoury appetites for violence and crime are being allowed to wander the streets unchecked, attempting to gain asylum over numbers of years. People should be concerned about anyone with clearly such a broken mind that would perform such an unsavoury act of violence, whether asylum seeker or born and bred in the U.K." Do you genuinely believe people aren't concerned with UK born criminals? 'I know you're worried about refugees who we know are criminals but what about UK born?' | |||
"Having scrolled through 'umpteen re-quoted passages beginning with "What the actual fuck is going on here??..." and continuing ad nauseam, I have yet to see anything mentioned in the thread about 'Clapham attacks'. I was hoping this post would change the trajectory, but alas...
Yes, it does seem too have become a heaven sent opportunity for yet another thread about immigration.
Fab's favourite topic.
'bloody foreigners'.
When people are regularly being hurt, assaulted and killed them yeah I think people are well within their rights to question immigration and the lack of vetting.
Personally I have nothing against anyone who needs help but until a better,fairer and genuinely more robust system is in place to prevent people like this entering the country.
Do you think the countries that most of the people come from would put up with us should the situation be reversed??
It's sad that this happens and I feel people who are genuine need of help and assistance are being overlooked in favour of people (mainly single men) exploiting loopholes and knowing how to "play"the system.
I hate that we can't help all those who need help but I also hate people taking the piss out of this countries good nature and kindness.
Did you know 1300 people entered the country illegally in January of this year alone and that's the ones we know about!!
I worked in Harmonndsworth centre back in the early 90's
This has been going on for a very long time,I could go on for a long time regards the amount of assistance given from day one all at the UK tax payers expense.
Meanwhile we have record numbers of people sleeping rough and using food banks.
Something is very wrong with the current system,too many apologists jump to the defence of the criminal elements entering the UK under the guise of "asylum" and turn a blind eye to families unable to heat their homes or feed themselves.
You have to see it's possible to be concerned about the current situation with illegal immigrants and not deemed a racist A hole.
It's just common and economical sense to question why this is happening and how it can be made fairer, rather than just letting anyone in regardless.
The attack in question was sickening and if the man is found once he's been treated,them immediately deported to let the authorities of his home country deal with him.
I'm sorry if you all feel that this is a controversial opinion but I can't see how things are going to improve unless a line is drawn in the sand enough is enough.
Then once a better system is in place then allow people to enter via the proper channels and not encouraging organised crime syndicates to profit from people trafficking across hazardous seas.
You’re punishing all migrants for a problem caused by government, based upon the actions of a few (who wouldn’t have been able to harm anyone if the home office did their job correctly)
So how many deaths does it take then before it becomes serious?
1,10,100 maybe 1000 then perhaps we can say "oh yeah maybe we should have stopped them before this "
Now I don't know if you remember but about 7 years ago ISIS said as part of their jihad they where going to flood Europe with holy warriors.
Now OBVIOUSLY I'm not saying that they are all part of this,but from what I see Europe is being flooded with many thousands of men from that region whom we have no idea of their intentions.
Like I said more robust system in place to filter out the possibility of anyone with questionable motives entering the country.
I agree we should have a robust asylum system - I’ve said that throughout this thread.
What I’ve not said is “I think the time has come to stop all immigrants illegal or otherwise entering the UK”
An asylum seeker from a war the UK started in Afghanistan, you could not make it up.
We did not start a war with Afghanistan. The US went to help the the country from being taken over by the talaban. I'm guessing their plan was to liberate the country and get rewarded in oil but it kind of backfired. Uk soldiers were sent in to assist the Americans as piece keepers. Technically the uk was never in direct war with Afghanistan the country was being run by the taliban for years before we went there, only reason they went there was for bin laden and they knew he had left the country within a couple of months so no reason to be there for nearly 20 years, and reason we joined in because phony blair was americas bitch, that and his own vanity, the bell end wanted to be rememberd, and im pretty sure all those dead and injured british soilders would disagree with you about us not being in a war with afghanistan
I see this is still mainly about the Clapham story.
People don't care about what happened in Clapham, they just want to rant about immigrants.
The issue here is more people want to talk about the failings that allowed the attack to happen.
That is human nature trust, always has been, let a stranger into the tribe and when they turn out to be bad the people no longer want strangers allowed into the tribe.
You seem to be at odds with that instinct.
Yeah that's what I said, in less words.
People just want to rant about immigrants.
Mostly they are not, they are questioning how the system is so bad it allowed an illegal immigrant, he had been refused entry into the country to stay here and during that time he committed a sexual offence, was convicted and still managed to claim asylum on the 3 rd attempt 6 - 8 years later.
The system should have been strong enough for him to be removed at the first failure, and because it wasn't we now have a woman and children suffering from being attacked with acid.
People should be concerned that there is a strong possibility that other people with equally unsavoury appetites for violence and crime are being allowed to wander the streets unchecked, attempting to gain asylum over numbers of years.
Are these people equally concerned when a non-immigrant commits a similar crime?
I'd say not, or if they are, they keep it to themselves. Hence, they just want to rant about immigrants."If you really believe that I suggest you read all the capital punishment threads there are out there, or maybe the Nottingham one from last week. People are outraged when heinous crimes are committed…but more so when they are committed by someone who shouldn’t have been in the position to do so - whether that be the ‘fault’ of the Home Office, Probation Service, Social Services or any other department who could or should have acted differently. | |||
"Having scrolled through 'umpteen re-quoted passages beginning with "What the actual fuck is going on here??..." and continuing ad nauseam, I have yet to see anything mentioned in the thread about 'Clapham attacks'. I was hoping this post would change the trajectory, but alas...
Yes, it does seem too have become a heaven sent opportunity for yet another thread about immigration.
Fab's favourite topic.
'bloody foreigners'.
When people are regularly being hurt, assaulted and killed them yeah I think people are well within their rights to question immigration and the lack of vetting.
Personally I have nothing against anyone who needs help but until a better,fairer and genuinely more robust system is in place to prevent people like this entering the country.
Do you think the countries that most of the people come from would put up with us should the situation be reversed??
It's sad that this happens and I feel people who are genuine need of help and assistance are being overlooked in favour of people (mainly single men) exploiting loopholes and knowing how to "play"the system.
I hate that we can't help all those who need help but I also hate people taking the piss out of this countries good nature and kindness.
Did you know 1300 people entered the country illegally in January of this year alone and that's the ones we know about!!
I worked in Harmonndsworth centre back in the early 90's
This has been going on for a very long time,I could go on for a long time regards the amount of assistance given from day one all at the UK tax payers expense.
Meanwhile we have record numbers of people sleeping rough and using food banks.
Something is very wrong with the current system,too many apologists jump to the defence of the criminal elements entering the UK under the guise of "asylum" and turn a blind eye to families unable to heat their homes or feed themselves.
You have to see it's possible to be concerned about the current situation with illegal immigrants and not deemed a racist A hole.
It's just common and economical sense to question why this is happening and how it can be made fairer, rather than just letting anyone in regardless.
The attack in question was sickening and if the man is found once he's been treated,them immediately deported to let the authorities of his home country deal with him.
I'm sorry if you all feel that this is a controversial opinion but I can't see how things are going to improve unless a line is drawn in the sand enough is enough.
Then once a better system is in place then allow people to enter via the proper channels and not encouraging organised crime syndicates to profit from people trafficking across hazardous seas.
You’re punishing all migrants for a problem caused by government, based upon the actions of a few (who wouldn’t have been able to harm anyone if the home office did their job correctly)
So how many deaths does it take then before it becomes serious?
1,10,100 maybe 1000 then perhaps we can say "oh yeah maybe we should have stopped them before this "
Now I don't know if you remember but about 7 years ago ISIS said as part of their jihad they where going to flood Europe with holy warriors.
Now OBVIOUSLY I'm not saying that they are all part of this,but from what I see Europe is being flooded with many thousands of men from that region whom we have no idea of their intentions.
Like I said more robust system in place to filter out the possibility of anyone with questionable motives entering the country.
I agree we should have a robust asylum system - I’ve said that throughout this thread.
What I’ve not said is “I think the time has come to stop all immigrants illegal or otherwise entering the UK”
An asylum seeker from a war the UK started in Afghanistan, you could not make it up.
We did not start a war with Afghanistan. The US went to help the the country from being taken over by the talaban. I'm guessing their plan was to liberate the country and get rewarded in oil but it kind of backfired. Uk soldiers were sent in to assist the Americans as piece keepers. Technically the uk was never in direct war with Afghanistan the country was being run by the taliban for years before we went there, only reason they went there was for bin laden and they knew he had left the country within a couple of months so no reason to be there for nearly 20 years, and reason we joined in because phony blair was americas bitch, that and his own vanity, the bell end wanted to be rememberd, and im pretty sure all those dead and injured british soilders would disagree with you about us not being in a war with afghanistan
I see this is still mainly about the Clapham story.
People don't care about what happened in Clapham, they just want to rant about immigrants.
The issue here is more people want to talk about the failings that allowed the attack to happen.
That is human nature trust, always has been, let a stranger into the tribe and when they turn out to be bad the people no longer want strangers allowed into the tribe.
You seem to be at odds with that instinct.
Yeah that's what I said, in less words.
People just want to rant about immigrants.
Mostly they are not, they are questioning how the system is so bad it allowed an illegal immigrant, he had been refused entry into the country to stay here and during that time he committed a sexual offence, was convicted and still managed to claim asylum on the 3 rd attempt 6 - 8 years later.
The system should have been strong enough for him to be removed at the first failure, and because it wasn't we now have a woman and children suffering from being attacked with acid.
People should be concerned that there is a strong possibility that other people with equally unsavoury appetites for violence and crime are being allowed to wander the streets unchecked, attempting to gain asylum over numbers of years.
Are these people equally concerned when a non-immigrant commits a similar crime?
I'd say not, or if they are, they keep it to themselves. Hence, they just want to rant about immigrants.
If you really believe that I suggest you read all the capital punishment threads there are out there, or maybe the Nottingham one from last week. People are outraged when heinous crimes are committed…but more so when they are committed by someone who shouldn’t have been in the position to do so - whether that be the ‘fault’ of the Home Office, Probation Service, Social Services or any other department who could or should have acted differently. "I mean it's blatantly obvious, as soon as the perpetrator is foreign, people go nuts for it on here. When it's a British person, barely ever gets a mention. These incidents are the right wing media's dream. Political parties like Reform love it too, they can ramp up their rhetoric. | |||
"What the actual fuck is going on here?? This guy failed 2 asylum applications, was convicted of a sex crime, changed his religion to Christianity and claimed his life would be in danger if he returned to Afghanistan and was granted asylum on the third attempt. Tell me again that people don't know how to play our system. " Asylum applications are a repetitive application and appeal lawyer driven lucrative getting all the boxes ticked exercise.   | |||
"Having scrolled through 'umpteen re-quoted passages beginning with "What the actual fuck is going on here??..." and continuing ad nauseam, I have yet to see anything mentioned in the thread about 'Clapham attacks'. I was hoping this post would change the trajectory, but alas...
Yes, it does seem too have become a heaven sent opportunity for yet another thread about immigration.
Fab's favourite topic.
'bloody foreigners'.
When people are regularly being hurt, assaulted and killed them yeah I think people are well within their rights to question immigration and the lack of vetting.
Personally I have nothing against anyone who needs help but until a better,fairer and genuinely more robust system is in place to prevent people like this entering the country.
Do you think the countries that most of the people come from would put up with us should the situation be reversed??
It's sad that this happens and I feel people who are genuine need of help and assistance are being overlooked in favour of people (mainly single men) exploiting loopholes and knowing how to "play"the system.
I hate that we can't help all those who need help but I also hate people taking the piss out of this countries good nature and kindness.
Did you know 1300 people entered the country illegally in January of this year alone and that's the ones we know about!!
I worked in Harmonndsworth centre back in the early 90's
This has been going on for a very long time,I could go on for a long time regards the amount of assistance given from day one all at the UK tax payers expense.
Meanwhile we have record numbers of people sleeping rough and using food banks.
Something is very wrong with the current system,too many apologists jump to the defence of the criminal elements entering the UK under the guise of "asylum" and turn a blind eye to families unable to heat their homes or feed themselves.
You have to see it's possible to be concerned about the current situation with illegal immigrants and not deemed a racist A hole.
It's just common and economical sense to question why this is happening and how it can be made fairer, rather than just letting anyone in regardless.
The attack in question was sickening and if the man is found once he's been treated,them immediately deported to let the authorities of his home country deal with him.
I'm sorry if you all feel that this is a controversial opinion but I can't see how things are going to improve unless a line is drawn in the sand enough is enough.
Then once a better system is in place then allow people to enter via the proper channels and not encouraging organised crime syndicates to profit from people trafficking across hazardous seas.
You’re punishing all migrants for a problem caused by government, based upon the actions of a few (who wouldn’t have been able to harm anyone if the home office did their job correctly)
So how many deaths does it take then before it becomes serious?
1,10,100 maybe 1000 then perhaps we can say "oh yeah maybe we should have stopped them before this "
Now I don't know if you remember but about 7 years ago ISIS said as part of their jihad they where going to flood Europe with holy warriors.
Now OBVIOUSLY I'm not saying that they are all part of this,but from what I see Europe is being flooded with many thousands of men from that region whom we have no idea of their intentions.
Like I said more robust system in place to filter out the possibility of anyone with questionable motives entering the country.
I agree we should have a robust asylum system - I’ve said that throughout this thread.
What I’ve not said is “I think the time has come to stop all immigrants illegal or otherwise entering the UK”
An asylum seeker from a war the UK started in Afghanistan, you could not make it up.
We did not start a war with Afghanistan. The US went to help the the country from being taken over by the talaban. I'm guessing their plan was to liberate the country and get rewarded in oil but it kind of backfired. Uk soldiers were sent in to assist the Americans as piece keepers. Technically the uk was never in direct war with Afghanistan the country was being run by the taliban for years before we went there, only reason they went there was for bin laden and they knew he had left the country within a couple of months so no reason to be there for nearly 20 years, and reason we joined in because phony blair was americas bitch, that and his own vanity, the bell end wanted to be rememberd, and im pretty sure all those dead and injured british soilders would disagree with you about us not being in a war with afghanistan
I see this is still mainly about the Clapham story.
People don't care about what happened in Clapham, they just want to rant about immigrants.
The issue here is more people want to talk about the failings that allowed the attack to happen.
That is human nature trust, always has been, let a stranger into the tribe and when they turn out to be bad the people no longer want strangers allowed into the tribe.
You seem to be at odds with that instinct.
Yeah that's what I said, in less words.
People just want to rant about immigrants.
Mostly they are not, they are questioning how the system is so bad it allowed an illegal immigrant, he had been refused entry into the country to stay here and during that time he committed a sexual offence, was convicted and still managed to claim asylum on the 3 rd attempt 6 - 8 years later.
The system should have been strong enough for him to be removed at the first failure, and because it wasn't we now have a woman and children suffering from being attacked with acid.
People should be concerned that there is a strong possibility that other people with equally unsavoury appetites for violence and crime are being allowed to wander the streets unchecked, attempting to gain asylum over numbers of years.
Are these people equally concerned when a non-immigrant commits a similar crime?
I'd say not, or if they are, they keep it to themselves. Hence, they just want to rant about immigrants.
If you really believe that I suggest you read all the capital punishment threads there are out there, or maybe the Nottingham one from last week. People are outraged when heinous crimes are committed…but more so when they are committed by someone who shouldn’t have been in the position to do so - whether that be the ‘fault’ of the Home Office, Probation Service, Social Services or any other department who could or should have acted differently.
I mean it's blatantly obvious, as soon as the perpetrator is foreign, people go nuts for it on here. When it's a British person, barely ever gets a mention.
These incidents are the right wing media's dream. Political parties like Reform love it too, they can ramp up their rhetoric. "When a British person commits a crime, its not necessarily political so you wouldn't see it on here. When a foreign person commits a crime, its political so you would see it on here. Conundrum solved | |||
"Having scrolled through 'umpteen re-quoted passages beginning with "What the actual fuck is going on here??..." and continuing ad nauseam, I have yet to see anything mentioned in the thread about 'Clapham attacks'. I was hoping this post would change the trajectory, but alas...
Yes, it does seem too have become a heaven sent opportunity for yet another thread about immigration.
Fab's favourite topic.
'bloody foreigners'.
When people are regularly being hurt, assaulted and killed them yeah I think people are well within their rights to question immigration and the lack of vetting.
Personally I have nothing against anyone who needs help but until a better,fairer and genuinely more robust system is in place to prevent people like this entering the country.
Do you think the countries that most of the people come from would put up with us should the situation be reversed??
It's sad that this happens and I feel people who are genuine need of help and assistance are being overlooked in favour of people (mainly single men) exploiting loopholes and knowing how to "play"the system.
I hate that we can't help all those who need help but I also hate people taking the piss out of this countries good nature and kindness.
Did you know 1300 people entered the country illegally in January of this year alone and that's the ones we know about!!
I worked in Harmonndsworth centre back in the early 90's
This has been going on for a very long time,I could go on for a long time regards the amount of assistance given from day one all at the UK tax payers expense.
Meanwhile we have record numbers of people sleeping rough and using food banks.
Something is very wrong with the current system,too many apologists jump to the defence of the criminal elements entering the UK under the guise of "asylum" and turn a blind eye to families unable to heat their homes or feed themselves.
You have to see it's possible to be concerned about the current situation with illegal immigrants and not deemed a racist A hole.
It's just common and economical sense to question why this is happening and how it can be made fairer, rather than just letting anyone in regardless.
The attack in question was sickening and if the man is found once he's been treated,them immediately deported to let the authorities of his home country deal with him.
I'm sorry if you all feel that this is a controversial opinion but I can't see how things are going to improve unless a line is drawn in the sand enough is enough.
Then once a better system is in place then allow people to enter via the proper channels and not encouraging organised crime syndicates to profit from people trafficking across hazardous seas.
You’re punishing all migrants for a problem caused by government, based upon the actions of a few (who wouldn’t have been able to harm anyone if the home office did their job correctly)
So how many deaths does it take then before it becomes serious?
1,10,100 maybe 1000 then perhaps we can say "oh yeah maybe we should have stopped them before this "
Now I don't know if you remember but about 7 years ago ISIS said as part of their jihad they where going to flood Europe with holy warriors.
Now OBVIOUSLY I'm not saying that they are all part of this,but from what I see Europe is being flooded with many thousands of men from that region whom we have no idea of their intentions.
Like I said more robust system in place to filter out the possibility of anyone with questionable motives entering the country.
I agree we should have a robust asylum system - I’ve said that throughout this thread.
What I’ve not said is “I think the time has come to stop all immigrants illegal or otherwise entering the UK”
An asylum seeker from a war the UK started in Afghanistan, you could not make it up.
We did not start a war with Afghanistan. The US went to help the the country from being taken over by the talaban. I'm guessing their plan was to liberate the country and get rewarded in oil but it kind of backfired. Uk soldiers were sent in to assist the Americans as piece keepers. Technically the uk was never in direct war with Afghanistan the country was being run by the taliban for years before we went there, only reason they went there was for bin laden and they knew he had left the country within a couple of months so no reason to be there for nearly 20 years, and reason we joined in because phony blair was americas bitch, that and his own vanity, the bell end wanted to be rememberd, and im pretty sure all those dead and injured british soilders would disagree with you about us not being in a war with afghanistan
I see this is still mainly about the Clapham story.
People don't care about what happened in Clapham, they just want to rant about immigrants.
The issue here is more people want to talk about the failings that allowed the attack to happen.
That is human nature trust, always has been, let a stranger into the tribe and when they turn out to be bad the people no longer want strangers allowed into the tribe.
You seem to be at odds with that instinct.
Yeah that's what I said, in less words.
People just want to rant about immigrants.
Mostly they are not, they are questioning how the system is so bad it allowed an illegal immigrant, he had been refused entry into the country to stay here and during that time he committed a sexual offence, was convicted and still managed to claim asylum on the 3 rd attempt 6 - 8 years later.
The system should have been strong enough for him to be removed at the first failure, and because it wasn't we now have a woman and children suffering from being attacked with acid.
People should be concerned that there is a strong possibility that other people with equally unsavoury appetites for violence and crime are being allowed to wander the streets unchecked, attempting to gain asylum over numbers of years.
Are these people equally concerned when a non-immigrant commits a similar crime?
I'd say not, or if they are, they keep it to themselves. Hence, they just want to rant about immigrants.
If you really believe that I suggest you read all the capital punishment threads there are out there, or maybe the Nottingham one from last week. People are outraged when heinous crimes are committed…but more so when they are committed by someone who shouldn’t have been in the position to do so - whether that be the ‘fault’ of the Home Office, Probation Service, Social Services or any other department who could or should have acted differently.
I mean it's blatantly obvious, as soon as the perpetrator is foreign, people go nuts for it on here. When it's a British person, barely ever gets a mention.
These incidents are the right wing media's dream. Political parties like Reform love it too, they can ramp up their rhetoric. "You are equally blinded by these events, you throw away the crime and the lack of accountability by the agencies that should have been more thorough, preventing these things from happening and favour of an immigrant regardless of circumstance, right down to what about if someone else does this crime!!! You throw the victims under the bus in a virtue signalling flourish, and in doing so you’ve failed again to notice that the conversation is about the asylum process and the way it is managed, not the immigrants. Wake up! | |||
"What the actual fuck is going on here?? This guy failed 2 asylum applications, was convicted of a sex crime, changed his religion to Christianity and claimed his life would be in danger if he returned to Afghanistan and was granted asylum on the third attempt. Tell me again that people don't know how to play our system. Asylum applications are a repetitive application and appeal lawyer driven lucrative getting all the boxes ticked exercise. "£4bn a year atm Leicester alone has £30million cost over two years https://www.insidehousing.co.uk/news/streamlined-asylum-process-could-cost-council-30m-in-two-years-84694 | |||
" People should be concerned that there is a strong possibility that other people with equally unsavoury appetites for violence and crime are being allowed to wander the streets unchecked, attempting to gain asylum over numbers of years. People should be concerned about anyone with clearly such a broken mind that would perform such an unsavoury act of violence, whether asylum seeker or born and bred in the U.K. Do you genuinely believe people aren't concerned with UK born criminals? 'I know you're worried about refugees who we know are criminals but what about UK born?' " I do believe that incidents like this receive more interest and outrage than equivalent cases involving U.K born citizens. Now part of that comes down to the media, who use these stories to chum the water, undoubtedly. | |||
" People should be concerned that there is a strong possibility that other people with equally unsavoury appetites for violence and crime are being allowed to wander the streets unchecked, attempting to gain asylum over numbers of years. People should be concerned about anyone with clearly such a broken mind that would perform such an unsavoury act of violence, whether asylum seeker or born and bred in the U.K. Do you genuinely believe people aren't concerned with UK born criminals? 'I know you're worried about refugees who we know are criminals but what about UK born?' I do believe that incidents like this receive more interest and outrage than equivalent cases involving U.K born citizens. Now part of that comes down to the media, who use these stories to chum the water, undoubtedly." Part of it also comes down to the fact that agencies are failing the citizens. This particular man should never have been granted asylum, so of course its going to get more press. | |||
" People should be concerned that there is a strong possibility that other people with equally unsavoury appetites for violence and crime are being allowed to wander the streets unchecked, attempting to gain asylum over numbers of years. People should be concerned about anyone with clearly such a broken mind that would perform such an unsavoury act of violence, whether asylum seeker or born and bred in the U.K. Do you genuinely believe people aren't concerned with UK born criminals? 'I know you're worried about refugees who we know are criminals but what about UK born?' I do believe that incidents like this receive more interest and outrage than equivalent cases involving U.K born citizens. Now part of that comes down to the media, who use these stories to chum the water, undoubtedly." Islam the largest contributor https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/infographics/terrorism-eu-facts-figures/ | |||
" People should be concerned that there is a strong possibility that other people with equally unsavoury appetites for violence and crime are being allowed to wander the streets unchecked, attempting to gain asylum over numbers of years. People should be concerned about anyone with clearly such a broken mind that would perform such an unsavoury act of violence, whether asylum seeker or born and bred in the U.K. Do you genuinely believe people aren't concerned with UK born criminals? 'I know you're worried about refugees who we know are criminals but what about UK born?' I do believe that incidents like this receive more interest and outrage than equivalent cases involving U.K born citizens. Now part of that comes down to the media, who use these stories to chum the water, undoubtedly. Part of it also comes down to the fact that agencies are failing the citizens. This particular man should never have been granted asylum, so of course its going to get more press. " That’s a definite in this case, yes. | |||
" People should be concerned that there is a strong possibility that other people with equally unsavoury appetites for violence and crime are being allowed to wander the streets unchecked, attempting to gain asylum over numbers of years. People should be concerned about anyone with clearly such a broken mind that would perform such an unsavoury act of violence, whether asylum seeker or born and bred in the U.K. Do you genuinely believe people aren't concerned with UK born criminals? 'I know you're worried about refugees who we know are criminals but what about UK born?' I do believe that incidents like this receive more interest and outrage than equivalent cases involving U.K born citizens. Now part of that comes down to the media, who use these stories to chum the water, undoubtedly." That’s how it should be. We have done these people a favour and they have betrayed our beneficence. | |||
" People should be concerned that there is a strong possibility that other people with equally unsavoury appetites for violence and crime are being allowed to wander the streets unchecked, attempting to gain asylum over numbers of years. People should be concerned about anyone with clearly such a broken mind that would perform such an unsavoury act of violence, whether asylum seeker or born and bred in the U.K. Do you genuinely believe people aren't concerned with UK born criminals? 'I know you're worried about refugees who we know are criminals but what about UK born?' I do believe that incidents like this receive more interest and outrage than equivalent cases involving U.K born citizens. Now part of that comes down to the media, who use these stories to chum the water, undoubtedly. Islam the largest contributor https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/infographics/terrorism-eu-facts-figures/ " Am I reading those graphs wrong? It seems to show there are more left wing terrorism offences than right wing. That's surely cannot be true? | |||
| |||
"Having scrolled through 'umpteen re-quoted passages beginning with "What the actual fuck is going on here??..." and continuing ad nauseam, I have yet to see anything mentioned in the thread about 'Clapham attacks'. I was hoping this post would change the trajectory, but alas...
Yes, it does seem too have become a heaven sent opportunity for yet another thread about immigration.
Fab's favourite topic.
'bloody foreigners'.
When people are regularly being hurt, assaulted and killed them yeah I think people are well within their rights to question immigration and the lack of vetting.
Personally I have nothing against anyone who needs help but until a better,fairer and genuinely more robust system is in place to prevent people like this entering the country.
Do you think the countries that most of the people come from would put up with us should the situation be reversed??
It's sad that this happens and I feel people who are genuine need of help and assistance are being overlooked in favour of people (mainly single men) exploiting loopholes and knowing how to "play"the system.
I hate that we can't help all those who need help but I also hate people taking the piss out of this countries good nature and kindness.
Did you know 1300 people entered the country illegally in January of this year alone and that's the ones we know about!!
I worked in Harmonndsworth centre back in the early 90's
This has been going on for a very long time,I could go on for a long time regards the amount of assistance given from day one all at the UK tax payers expense.
Meanwhile we have record numbers of people sleeping rough and using food banks.
Something is very wrong with the current system,too many apologists jump to the defence of the criminal elements entering the UK under the guise of "asylum" and turn a blind eye to families unable to heat their homes or feed themselves.
You have to see it's possible to be concerned about the current situation with illegal immigrants and not deemed a racist A hole.
It's just common and economical sense to question why this is happening and how it can be made fairer, rather than just letting anyone in regardless.
The attack in question was sickening and if the man is found once he's been treated,them immediately deported to let the authorities of his home country deal with him.
I'm sorry if you all feel that this is a controversial opinion but I can't see how things are going to improve unless a line is drawn in the sand enough is enough.
Then once a better system is in place then allow people to enter via the proper channels and not encouraging organised crime syndicates to profit from people trafficking across hazardous seas.
You’re punishing all migrants for a problem caused by government, based upon the actions of a few (who wouldn’t have been able to harm anyone if the home office did their job correctly)
So how many deaths does it take then before it becomes serious?
1,10,100 maybe 1000 then perhaps we can say "oh yeah maybe we should have stopped them before this "
Now I don't know if you remember but about 7 years ago ISIS said as part of their jihad they where going to flood Europe with holy warriors.
Now OBVIOUSLY I'm not saying that they are all part of this,but from what I see Europe is being flooded with many thousands of men from that region whom we have no idea of their intentions.
Like I said more robust system in place to filter out the possibility of anyone with questionable motives entering the country.
I agree we should have a robust asylum system - I’ve said that throughout this thread.
What I’ve not said is “I think the time has come to stop all immigrants illegal or otherwise entering the UK”
An asylum seeker from a war the UK started in Afghanistan, you could not make it up.
We did not start a war with Afghanistan. The US went to help the the country from being taken over by the talaban. I'm guessing their plan was to liberate the country and get rewarded in oil but it kind of backfired. Uk soldiers were sent in to assist the Americans as piece keepers. Technically the uk was never in direct war with Afghanistan the country was being run by the taliban for years before we went there, only reason they went there was for bin laden and they knew he had left the country within a couple of months so no reason to be there for nearly 20 years, and reason we joined in because phony blair was americas bitch, that and his own vanity, the bell end wanted to be rememberd, and im pretty sure all those dead and injured british soilders would disagree with you about us not being in a war with afghanistan
I see this is still mainly about the Clapham story.
People don't care about what happened in Clapham, they just want to rant about immigrants.
The issue here is more people want to talk about the failings that allowed the attack to happen.
That is human nature trust, always has been, let a stranger into the tribe and when they turn out to be bad the people no longer want strangers allowed into the tribe.
You seem to be at odds with that instinct.
Yeah that's what I said, in less words.
People just want to rant about immigrants.
Mostly they are not, they are questioning how the system is so bad it allowed an illegal immigrant, he had been refused entry into the country to stay here and during that time he committed a sexual offence, was convicted and still managed to claim asylum on the 3 rd attempt 6 - 8 years later.
The system should have been strong enough for him to be removed at the first failure, and because it wasn't we now have a woman and children suffering from being attacked with acid.
People should be concerned that there is a strong possibility that other people with equally unsavoury appetites for violence and crime are being allowed to wander the streets unchecked, attempting to gain asylum over numbers of years.
Are these people equally concerned when a non-immigrant commits a similar crime?
I'd say not, or if they are, they keep it to themselves. Hence, they just want to rant about immigrants.
If you really believe that I suggest you read all the capital punishment threads there are out there, or maybe the Nottingham one from last week. People are outraged when heinous crimes are committed…but more so when they are committed by someone who shouldn’t have been in the position to do so - whether that be the ‘fault’ of the Home Office, Probation Service, Social Services or any other department who could or should have acted differently.
I mean it's blatantly obvious, as soon as the perpetrator is foreign, people go nuts for it on here. When it's a British person, barely ever gets a mention.
These incidents are the right wing media's dream. Political parties like Reform love it too, they can ramp up their rhetoric.
You are equally blinded by these events,
"You've got this completely backwards. Some people are appalled by these crimes. Some people want to use them to further the anti-immigrant rhetoric. " you throw away the crime and the lack of accountability by the agencies that should have been more thorough, preventing these things from happening and favour of an immigrant regardless of circumstance, right down to what about if someone else does this crime!!! " 100% wrong. The crime is awful, people using it to bash immigrants are 'throwing away the crime'. They're shifting the focus and the conversation away from it and onto foreigners. " You throw the victims under the bus in a virtue signalling flourish, and in doing so you’ve failed again to notice that the conversation is about the asylum process and the way it is managed, not the immigrants. Wake up!" Again you've got this completely backwards. Those using it to push their rhetoric are not helping at all, and clearly don't actually give a fuck about the victims. | |||
" People should be concerned that there is a strong possibility that other people with equally unsavoury appetites for violence and crime are being allowed to wander the streets unchecked, attempting to gain asylum over numbers of years. People should be concerned about anyone with clearly such a broken mind that would perform such an unsavoury act of violence, whether asylum seeker or born and bred in the U.K. Do you genuinely believe people aren't concerned with UK born criminals? 'I know you're worried about refugees who we know are criminals but what about UK born?' I do believe that incidents like this receive more interest and outrage than equivalent cases involving U.K born citizens. Now part of that comes down to the media, who use these stories to chum the water, undoubtedly. That’s how it should be. We have done these people a favour and they have betrayed our beneficence." I’d say that an attack by an asylum seeker is no more or less heinous than an attack by a Brit.m, but I’m odd like that. | |||
" People should be concerned that there is a strong possibility that other people with equally unsavoury appetites for violence and crime are being allowed to wander the streets unchecked, attempting to gain asylum over numbers of years. People should be concerned about anyone with clearly such a broken mind that would perform such an unsavoury act of violence, whether asylum seeker or born and bred in the U.K. Do you genuinely believe people aren't concerned with UK born criminals? 'I know you're worried about refugees who we know are criminals but what about UK born?' I do believe that incidents like this receive more interest and outrage than equivalent cases involving U.K born citizens. Now part of that comes down to the media, who use these stories to chum the water, undoubtedly. Islam the largest contributor https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/infographics/terrorism-eu-facts-figures/ Am I reading those graphs wrong? It seems to show there are more left wing terrorism offences than right wing. That's surely cannot be true?" I was told that reading 1984 and the lord of the rings is what leads to terrorism | |||
| |||
" People should be concerned that there is a strong possibility that other people with equally unsavoury appetites for violence and crime are being allowed to wander the streets unchecked, attempting to gain asylum over numbers of years. People should be concerned about anyone with clearly such a broken mind that would perform such an unsavoury act of violence, whether asylum seeker or born and bred in the U.K. Do you genuinely believe people aren't concerned with UK born criminals? 'I know you're worried about refugees who we know are criminals but what about UK born?' I do believe that incidents like this receive more interest and outrage than equivalent cases involving U.K born citizens. Now part of that comes down to the media, who use these stories to chum the water, undoubtedly. That’s how it should be. We have done these people a favour and they have betrayed our beneficence. I’d say that an attack by an asylum seeker is no more or less heinous than an attack by a Brit.m, but I’m odd like that." There is a difference between some random guy attacking you and some guy you helped attacking you. Also, there is a difference between someone who has grown in the country within the systems here committing a crime against someone who grew elsewhere committing a crime, when it comes to whether this society has to take some responsibility for it. | |||
"Just found out today our Portuguese neighbour is being deported despite paying 4k for a 4 year work visa. He met a British girl in Portugal. Had a child and moved here with her 2 years ago. Applied for citizenship immediately, had to have a written English test end of last year and failed. (I'm dyslexic and Dyscalculia) I would have failed the test, as I did my GCSE exams. He works 6 days a week for a regional building firm, pays all his tax and NI contributions. As does she. They now have 2 children. He is being deported next month and she's going with him with the children. The system stinks!" It’s England. People need to be able to speak English otherwise they are no use to us. Of course the biggest problem this country has is the success of the English language. So many people can speak it. They all want to come here because it’s easy. It’s why Japan has been much more successful at maintaining its culture. | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"Having scrolled through 'umpteen re-quoted passages beginning with "What the actual fuck is going on here??..." and continuing ad nauseam, I have yet to see anything mentioned in the thread about 'Clapham attacks'. I was hoping this post would change the trajectory, but alas...
Yes, it does seem too have become a heaven sent opportunity for yet another thread about immigration.
Fab's favourite topic.
'bloody foreigners'.
When people are regularly being hurt, assaulted and killed them yeah I think people are well within their rights to question immigration and the lack of vetting.
Personally I have nothing against anyone who needs help but until a better,fairer and genuinely more robust system is in place to prevent people like this entering the country.
Do you think the countries that most of the people come from would put up with us should the situation be reversed??
It's sad that this happens and I feel people who are genuine need of help and assistance are being overlooked in favour of people (mainly single men) exploiting loopholes and knowing how to "play"the system.
I hate that we can't help all those who need help but I also hate people taking the piss out of this countries good nature and kindness.
Did you know 1300 people entered the country illegally in January of this year alone and that's the ones we know about!!
I worked in Harmonndsworth centre back in the early 90's
This has been going on for a very long time,I could go on for a long time regards the amount of assistance given from day one all at the UK tax payers expense.
Meanwhile we have record numbers of people sleeping rough and using food banks.
Something is very wrong with the current system,too many apologists jump to the defence of the criminal elements entering the UK under the guise of "asylum" and turn a blind eye to families unable to heat their homes or feed themselves.
You have to see it's possible to be concerned about the current situation with illegal immigrants and not deemed a racist A hole.
It's just common and economical sense to question why this is happening and how it can be made fairer, rather than just letting anyone in regardless.
The attack in question was sickening and if the man is found once he's been treated,them immediately deported to let the authorities of his home country deal with him.
I'm sorry if you all feel that this is a controversial opinion but I can't see how things are going to improve unless a line is drawn in the sand enough is enough.
Then once a better system is in place then allow people to enter via the proper channels and not encouraging organised crime syndicates to profit from people trafficking across hazardous seas.
You’re punishing all migrants for a problem caused by government, based upon the actions of a few (who wouldn’t have been able to harm anyone if the home office did their job correctly)
So how many deaths does it take then before it becomes serious?
1,10,100 maybe 1000 then perhaps we can say "oh yeah maybe we should have stopped them before this "
Now I don't know if you remember but about 7 years ago ISIS said as part of their jihad they where going to flood Europe with holy warriors.
Now OBVIOUSLY I'm not saying that they are all part of this,but from what I see Europe is being flooded with many thousands of men from that region whom we have no idea of their intentions.
Like I said more robust system in place to filter out the possibility of anyone with questionable motives entering the country.
I agree we should have a robust asylum system - I’ve said that throughout this thread.
What I’ve not said is “I think the time has come to stop all immigrants illegal or otherwise entering the UK”
An asylum seeker from a war the UK started in Afghanistan, you could not make it up.
We did not start a war with Afghanistan. The US went to help the the country from being taken over by the talaban. I'm guessing their plan was to liberate the country and get rewarded in oil but it kind of backfired. Uk soldiers were sent in to assist the Americans as piece keepers. Technically the uk was never in direct war with Afghanistan the country was being run by the taliban for years before we went there, only reason they went there was for bin laden and they knew he had left the country within a couple of months so no reason to be there for nearly 20 years, and reason we joined in because phony blair was americas bitch, that and his own vanity, the bell end wanted to be rememberd, and im pretty sure all those dead and injured british soilders would disagree with you about us not being in a war with afghanistan
I see this is still mainly about the Clapham story.
People don't care about what happened in Clapham, they just want to rant about immigrants.
The issue here is more people want to talk about the failings that allowed the attack to happen.
That is human nature trust, always has been, let a stranger into the tribe and when they turn out to be bad the people no longer want strangers allowed into the tribe.
You seem to be at odds with that instinct.
Yeah that's what I said, in less words.
People just want to rant about immigrants.
Mostly they are not, they are questioning how the system is so bad it allowed an illegal immigrant, he had been refused entry into the country to stay here and during that time he committed a sexual offence, was convicted and still managed to claim asylum on the 3 rd attempt 6 - 8 years later.
The system should have been strong enough for him to be removed at the first failure, and because it wasn't we now have a woman and children suffering from being attacked with acid.
People should be concerned that there is a strong possibility that other people with equally unsavoury appetites for violence and crime are being allowed to wander the streets unchecked, attempting to gain asylum over numbers of years.
Are these people equally concerned when a non-immigrant commits a similar crime?
I'd say not, or if they are, they keep it to themselves. Hence, they just want to rant about immigrants.
If you really believe that I suggest you read all the capital punishment threads there are out there, or maybe the Nottingham one from last week. People are outraged when heinous crimes are committed…but more so when they are committed by someone who shouldn’t have been in the position to do so - whether that be the ‘fault’ of the Home Office, Probation Service, Social Services or any other department who could or should have acted differently.
I mean it's blatantly obvious, as soon as the perpetrator is foreign, people go nuts for it on here. When it's a British person, barely ever gets a mention.
These incidents are the right wing media's dream. Political parties like Reform love it too, they can ramp up their rhetoric.
You are equally blinded by these events,
You've got this completely backwards.
Some people are appalled by these crimes.
Some people want to use them to further the anti-immigrant rhetoric.
you throw away the crime and the lack of accountability by the agencies that should have been more thorough, preventing these things from happening and favour of an immigrant regardless of circumstance, right down to what about if someone else does this crime!!!
100% wrong. The crime is awful, people using it to bash immigrants are 'throwing away the crime'. They're shifting the focus and the conversation away from it and onto foreigners.
You throw the victims under the bus in a virtue signalling flourish, and in doing so you’ve failed again to notice that the conversation is about the asylum process and the way it is managed, not the immigrants. Wake up!
Again you've got this completely backwards. Those using it to push their rhetoric are not helping at all, and clearly don't actually give a fuck about the victims.
"Wake up.... you can't be this out of touch | |||
"Having scrolled through 'umpteen re-quoted passages beginning with "What the actual fuck is going on here??..." and continuing ad nauseam, I have yet to see anything mentioned in the thread about 'Clapham attacks'. I was hoping this post would change the trajectory, but alas...
Yes, it does seem too have become a heaven sent opportunity for yet another thread about immigration.
Fab's favourite topic.
'bloody foreigners'.
When people are regularly being hurt, assaulted and killed them yeah I think people are well within their rights to question immigration and the lack of vetting.
Personally I have nothing against anyone who needs help but until a better,fairer and genuinely more robust system is in place to prevent people like this entering the country.
Do you think the countries that most of the people come from would put up with us should the situation be reversed??
It's sad that this happens and I feel people who are genuine need of help and assistance are being overlooked in favour of people (mainly single men) exploiting loopholes and knowing how to "play"the system.
I hate that we can't help all those who need help but I also hate people taking the piss out of this countries good nature and kindness.
Did you know 1300 people entered the country illegally in January of this year alone and that's the ones we know about!!
I worked in Harmonndsworth centre back in the early 90's
This has been going on for a very long time,I could go on for a long time regards the amount of assistance given from day one all at the UK tax payers expense.
Meanwhile we have record numbers of people sleeping rough and using food banks.
Something is very wrong with the current system,too many apologists jump to the defence of the criminal elements entering the UK under the guise of "asylum" and turn a blind eye to families unable to heat their homes or feed themselves.
You have to see it's possible to be concerned about the current situation with illegal immigrants and not deemed a racist A hole.
It's just common and economical sense to question why this is happening and how it can be made fairer, rather than just letting anyone in regardless.
The attack in question was sickening and if the man is found once he's been treated,them immediately deported to let the authorities of his home country deal with him.
I'm sorry if you all feel that this is a controversial opinion but I can't see how things are going to improve unless a line is drawn in the sand enough is enough.
Then once a better system is in place then allow people to enter via the proper channels and not encouraging organised crime syndicates to profit from people trafficking across hazardous seas.
You’re punishing all migrants for a problem caused by government, based upon the actions of a few (who wouldn’t have been able to harm anyone if the home office did their job correctly)
So how many deaths does it take then before it becomes serious?
1,10,100 maybe 1000 then perhaps we can say "oh yeah maybe we should have stopped them before this "
Now I don't know if you remember but about 7 years ago ISIS said as part of their jihad they where going to flood Europe with holy warriors.
Now OBVIOUSLY I'm not saying that they are all part of this,but from what I see Europe is being flooded with many thousands of men from that region whom we have no idea of their intentions.
Like I said more robust system in place to filter out the possibility of anyone with questionable motives entering the country.
I agree we should have a robust asylum system - I’ve said that throughout this thread.
What I’ve not said is “I think the time has come to stop all immigrants illegal or otherwise entering the UK”
An asylum seeker from a war the UK started in Afghanistan, you could not make it up.
We did not start a war with Afghanistan. The US went to help the the country from being taken over by the talaban. I'm guessing their plan was to liberate the country and get rewarded in oil but it kind of backfired. Uk soldiers were sent in to assist the Americans as piece keepers. Technically the uk was never in direct war with Afghanistan the country was being run by the taliban for years before we went there, only reason they went there was for bin laden and they knew he had left the country within a couple of months so no reason to be there for nearly 20 years, and reason we joined in because phony blair was americas bitch, that and his own vanity, the bell end wanted to be rememberd, and im pretty sure all those dead and injured british soilders would disagree with you about us not being in a war with afghanistan
I see this is still mainly about the Clapham story.
People don't care about what happened in Clapham, they just want to rant about immigrants.
The issue here is more people want to talk about the failings that allowed the attack to happen.
That is human nature trust, always has been, let a stranger into the tribe and when they turn out to be bad the people no longer want strangers allowed into the tribe.
You seem to be at odds with that instinct.
Yeah that's what I said, in less words.
People just want to rant about immigrants.
Mostly they are not, they are questioning how the system is so bad it allowed an illegal immigrant, he had been refused entry into the country to stay here and during that time he committed a sexual offence, was convicted and still managed to claim asylum on the 3 rd attempt 6 - 8 years later.
The system should have been strong enough for him to be removed at the first failure, and because it wasn't we now have a woman and children suffering from being attacked with acid.
People should be concerned that there is a strong possibility that other people with equally unsavoury appetites for violence and crime are being allowed to wander the streets unchecked, attempting to gain asylum over numbers of years.
Are these people equally concerned when a non-immigrant commits a similar crime?
I'd say not, or if they are, they keep it to themselves. Hence, they just want to rant about immigrants.
If you really believe that I suggest you read all the capital punishment threads there are out there, or maybe the Nottingham one from last week. People are outraged when heinous crimes are committed…but more so when they are committed by someone who shouldn’t have been in the position to do so - whether that be the ‘fault’ of the Home Office, Probation Service, Social Services or any other department who could or should have acted differently.
I mean it's blatantly obvious, as soon as the perpetrator is foreign, people go nuts for it on here. When it's a British person, barely ever gets a mention.
These incidents are the right wing media's dream. Political parties like Reform love it too, they can ramp up their rhetoric.
You are equally blinded by these events,
You've got this completely backwards.
Some people are appalled by these crimes.
Some people want to use them to further the anti-immigrant rhetoric.
you throw away the crime and the lack of accountability by the agencies that should have been more thorough, preventing these things from happening and favour of an immigrant regardless of circumstance, right down to what about if someone else does this crime!!!
100% wrong. The crime is awful, people using it to bash immigrants are 'throwing away the crime'. They're shifting the focus and the conversation away from it and onto foreigners.
You throw the victims under the bus in a virtue signalling flourish, and in doing so you’ve failed again to notice that the conversation is about the asylum process and the way it is managed, not the immigrants. Wake up!
Again you've got this completely backwards. Those using it to push their rhetoric are not helping at all, and clearly don't actually give a fuck about the victims.
Wake up.... you can't be this out of touch"You're right, I've woken up. The only way to deal with this is to the focus on immigrants, don't worry about what happened, immigrants! Small boats! Asylum seekers, "fakeugees", I've subscribed to the Daily Mail, let's just storm the nearest refugee centre and vote for the Reform party. | |||
| |||
"Just found out today our Portuguese neighbour is being deported despite paying 4k for a 4 year work visa. He met a British girl in Portugal. Had a child and moved here with her 2 years ago. Applied for citizenship immediately, had to have a written English test end of last year and failed. (I'm dyslexic and Dyscalculia) I would have failed the test, as I did my GCSE exams. He works 6 days a week for a regional building firm, pays all his tax and NI contributions. As does she. They now have 2 children. He is being deported next month and she's going with him with the children. The system stinks! It’s England. People need to be able to speak English otherwise they are no use to us. Of course the biggest problem this country has is the success of the English language. So many people can speak it. They all want to come here because it’s easy. It’s why Japan has been much more successful at maintaining its culture." Japan also has an enormous demographic problem, with an aging population and will face severe economic decline without immigration or a surge in birth rate. | |||
"Just found out today our Portuguese neighbour is being deported despite paying 4k for a 4 year work visa. He met a British girl in Portugal. Had a child and moved here with her 2 years ago. Applied for citizenship immediately, had to have a written English test end of last year and failed. (I'm dyslexic and Dyscalculia) I would have failed the test, as I did my GCSE exams. He works 6 days a week for a regional building firm, pays all his tax and NI contributions. As does she. They now have 2 children. He is being deported next month and she's going with him with the children. The system stinks! It’s England. People need to be able to speak English otherwise they are no use to us. Of course the biggest problem this country has is the success of the English language. So many people can speak it. They all want to come here because it’s easy. It’s why Japan has been much more successful at maintaining its culture. Japan also has an enormous demographic problem, with an aging population and will face severe economic decline without immigration or a surge in birth rate." Isn't a period of economic decline a reasonable price to pay for not destroying the environment for ever? | |||
"Just found out today our Portuguese neighbour is being deported despite paying 4k for a 4 year work visa. He met a British girl in Portugal. Had a child and moved here with her 2 years ago. Applied for citizenship immediately, had to have a written English test end of last year and failed. (I'm dyslexic and Dyscalculia) I would have failed the test, as I did my GCSE exams. He works 6 days a week for a regional building firm, pays all his tax and NI contributions. As does she. They now have 2 children. He is being deported next month and she's going with him with the children. The system stinks! It’s England. People need to be able to speak English otherwise they are no use to us. Of course the biggest problem this country has is the success of the English language. So many people can speak it. They all want to come here because it’s easy. It’s why Japan has been much more successful at maintaining its culture. Japan also has an enormous demographic problem, with an aging population and will face severe economic decline without immigration or a surge in birth rate. Isn't a period of economic decline a reasonable price to pay for not destroying the environment for ever?" There had to be a balancing act between protecting the environment long-term (which is a priority for all), but without harming citizens *now*. Immigration doesn’t harm the environment though - unless you mean the cultural environment (which is something that is ever changing anyway) | |||
"Just found out today our Portuguese neighbour is being deported despite paying 4k for a 4 year work visa. He met a British girl in Portugal. Had a child and moved here with her 2 years ago. Applied for citizenship immediately, had to have a written English test end of last year and failed. (I'm dyslexic and Dyscalculia) I would have failed the test, as I did my GCSE exams. He works 6 days a week for a regional building firm, pays all his tax and NI contributions. As does she. They now have 2 children. He is being deported next month and she's going with him with the children. The system stinks! It’s England. People need to be able to speak English otherwise they are no use to us. Of course the biggest problem this country has is the success of the English language. So many people can speak it. They all want to come here because it’s easy. It’s why Japan has been much more successful at maintaining its culture. Japan also has an enormous demographic problem, with an aging population and will face severe economic decline without immigration or a surge in birth rate. Isn't a period of economic decline a reasonable price to pay for not destroying the environment for ever? There had to be a balancing act between protecting the environment long-term (which is a priority for all), but without harming citizens *now*. Immigration doesn’t harm the environment though - unless you mean the cultural environment (which is something that is ever changing anyway)" Culture changes anyway doesn't mean it is for good. Some people may not like the cultural changes. The Japanese do not want immigration because they have prioritised preserving their culture over economic growth and material comfort, which is totally fine. | |||
"Just found out today our Portuguese neighbour is being deported despite paying 4k for a 4 year work visa. He met a British girl in Portugal. Had a child and moved here with her 2 years ago. Applied for citizenship immediately, had to have a written English test end of last year and failed. (I'm dyslexic and Dyscalculia) I would have failed the test, as I did my GCSE exams. He works 6 days a week for a regional building firm, pays all his tax and NI contributions. As does she. They now have 2 children. He is being deported next month and she's going with him with the children. The system stinks! It’s England. People need to be able to speak English otherwise they are no use to us. Of course the biggest problem this country has is the success of the English language. So many people can speak it. They all want to come here because it’s easy. It’s why Japan has been much more successful at maintaining its culture. Japan also has an enormous demographic problem, with an aging population and will face severe economic decline without immigration or a surge in birth rate. Isn't a period of economic decline a reasonable price to pay for not destroying the environment for ever? There had to be a balancing act between protecting the environment long-term (which is a priority for all), but without harming citizens *now*. Immigration doesn’t harm the environment though - unless you mean the cultural environment (which is something that is ever changing anyway) Culture changes anyway doesn't mean it is for good. Some people may not like the cultural changes. The Japanese do not want immigration because they have prioritised preserving their culture over economic growth and material comfort, which is totally fine. " And yet they’re now changing their stance on immigration, in response, as previous attempts have failed to recruit the numbers they need. It’s as if immigration is vital in the 21st century, or something. | |||
"Just found out today our Portuguese neighbour is being deported despite paying 4k for a 4 year work visa. He met a British girl in Portugal. Had a child and moved here with her 2 years ago. Applied for citizenship immediately, had to have a written English test end of last year and failed. (I'm dyslexic and Dyscalculia) I would have failed the test, as I did my GCSE exams. He works 6 days a week for a regional building firm, pays all his tax and NI contributions. As does she. They now have 2 children. He is being deported next month and she's going with him with the children. The system stinks! It’s England. People need to be able to speak English otherwise they are no use to us. Of course the biggest problem this country has is the success of the English language. So many people can speak it. They all want to come here because it’s easy. It’s why Japan has been much more successful at maintaining its culture. Japan also has an enormous demographic problem, with an aging population and will face severe economic decline without immigration or a surge in birth rate. Isn't a period of economic decline a reasonable price to pay for not destroying the environment for ever? There had to be a balancing act between protecting the environment long-term (which is a priority for all), but without harming citizens *now*. Immigration doesn’t harm the environment though - unless you mean the cultural environment (which is something that is ever changing anyway) Culture changes anyway doesn't mean it is for good. Some people may not like the cultural changes. The Japanese do not want immigration because they have prioritised preserving their culture over economic growth and material comfort, which is totally fine. And yet they’re now changing their stance on immigration, in response, as previous attempts have failed to recruit the numbers they need. It’s as if immigration is vital in the 21st century, or something. " Their low skilled worker visa rules are particularly in favour of people from specific south east Asian countries which are closer to their culture. The other visa allowed was for people earning over 130,000 Euros. Migration is 'vital' for people who care more about material wealth over everything else. | |||
"Just found out today our Portuguese neighbour is being deported despite paying 4k for a 4 year work visa. He met a British girl in Portugal. Had a child and moved here with her 2 years ago. Applied for citizenship immediately, had to have a written English test end of last year and failed. (I'm dyslexic and Dyscalculia) I would have failed the test, as I did my GCSE exams. He works 6 days a week for a regional building firm, pays all his tax and NI contributions. As does she. They now have 2 children. He is being deported next month and she's going with him with the children. The system stinks! It’s England. People need to be able to speak English otherwise they are no use to us. Of course the biggest problem this country has is the success of the English language. So many people can speak it. They all want to come here because it’s easy. It’s why Japan has been much more successful at maintaining its culture. Japan also has an enormous demographic problem, with an aging population and will face severe economic decline without immigration or a surge in birth rate. Isn't a period of economic decline a reasonable price to pay for not destroying the environment for ever? There had to be a balancing act between protecting the environment long-term (which is a priority for all), but without harming citizens *now*. Immigration doesn’t harm the environment though - unless you mean the cultural environment (which is something that is ever changing anyway) Culture changes anyway doesn't mean it is for good. Some people may not like the cultural changes. The Japanese do not want immigration because they have prioritised preserving their culture over economic growth and material comfort, which is totally fine. And yet they’re now changing their stance on immigration, in response, as previous attempts have failed to recruit the numbers they need. It’s as if immigration is vital in the 21st century, or something. Their low skilled worker visa rules are particularly in favour of people from specific south east Asian countries which are closer to their culture. The other visa allowed was for people earning over 130,000 Euros. Migration is 'vital' for people who care more about material wealth over everything else. " So do you think a nation (and as a result its citizens) should suffer declining living standards due to economic failure, rather than have immigrants who maintain (and increase) economic standing? Personally, as I get older I’d like to know that my services are going to continue to be well funded. | |||
"... Japan also has an enormous demographic problem, with an aging population and will face severe economic decline without immigration or a surge in birth rate. Isn't a period of economic decline a reasonable price to pay for not destroying the environment for ever? There had to be a balancing act between protecting the environment long-term (which is a priority for all), but without harming citizens *now*. Immigration doesn’t harm the environment though - unless you mean the cultural environment (which is something that is ever changing anyway)" I'm not talking about immigration, other than its contribution to population growth. I'm talking about the need to halt growth and slowly reduce population to more sustainable levels. Fewer people but with, eventually, a higher standard of living for all and maybe even less war and strife worldwide. | |||
"Just found out today our Portuguese neighbour is being deported despite paying 4k for a 4 year work visa. He met a British girl in Portugal. Had a child and moved here with her 2 years ago. Applied for citizenship immediately, had to have a written English test end of last year and failed. (I'm dyslexic and Dyscalculia) I would have failed the test, as I did my GCSE exams. He works 6 days a week for a regional building firm, pays all his tax and NI contributions. As does she. They now have 2 children. He is being deported next month and she's going with him with the children. The system stinks! It’s England. People need to be able to speak English otherwise they are no use to us. Of course the biggest problem this country has is the success of the English language. So many people can speak it. They all want to come here because it’s easy. It’s why Japan has been much more successful at maintaining its culture. Japan also has an enormous demographic problem, with an aging population and will face severe economic decline without immigration or a surge in birth rate. Isn't a period of economic decline a reasonable price to pay for not destroying the environment for ever? There had to be a balancing act between protecting the environment long-term (which is a priority for all), but without harming citizens *now*. Immigration doesn’t harm the environment though - unless you mean the cultural environment (which is something that is ever changing anyway) Culture changes anyway doesn't mean it is for good. Some people may not like the cultural changes. The Japanese do not want immigration because they have prioritised preserving their culture over economic growth and material comfort, which is totally fine. And yet they’re now changing their stance on immigration, in response, as previous attempts have failed to recruit the numbers they need. It’s as if immigration is vital in the 21st century, or something. Their low skilled worker visa rules are particularly in favour of people from specific south east Asian countries which are closer to their culture. The other visa allowed was for people earning over 130,000 Euros. Migration is 'vital' for people who care more about material wealth over everything else. So do you think a nation (and as a result its citizens) should suffer declining living standards due to economic failure, rather than have immigrants who maintain (and increase) economic standing? Personally, as I get older I’d like to know that my services are going to continue to be well funded." Even if you accept your hypothesis, that immigration is necessary to maintain your standard of living, it’s perfectly rational for countries to prioritise preserving their culture and accepting slow decline over material wealth. In Europe despite mass immigration it looks like the population will be falling anyway, so they will be getting material decline and cultural chaos. Europe is on a long path of steady decline. Plus a falling population will be good for the environment. Surely you accept that saving the planet should be prioritised over your wealth. | |||
" Plus a falling population will be good for the environment. Surely you accept that saving the planet should be prioritised over your wealth. " The world absolutely should be looking at ways to reduce the population in order to limit environmental impact, but that’s a multigenerational commitment. And yes, that is likely to lead to an economic dip - unless we press on with automation (which goes into the other discussion about UBI). | |||
" Plus a falling population will be good for the environment. Surely you accept that saving the planet should be prioritised over your wealth. The world absolutely should be looking at ways to reduce the population in order to limit environmental impact, but that’s a multigenerational commitment. And yes, that is likely to lead to an economic dip - unless we press on with automation (which goes into the other discussion about UBI). " Oh yes this fantastical vision you are having of a world where people aren’t needed because robots are going to do everything but we need lots of immigrants to do things too. | |||
" Plus a falling population will be good for the environment. Surely you accept that saving the planet should be prioritised over your wealth. The world absolutely should be looking at ways to reduce the population in order to limit environmental impact, but that’s a multigenerational commitment. And yes, that is likely to lead to an economic dip - unless we press on with automation (which goes into the other discussion about UBI). Oh yes this fantastical vision you are having of a world where people aren’t needed because robots are going to do everything but we need lots of immigrants to do things too." One is long term inevitability, the other is short term necessity. Sorry, I thought that was obvious to anyone with an ounce of economic nous. | |||
" Plus a falling population will be good for the environment. Surely you accept that saving the planet should be prioritised over your wealth. The world absolutely should be looking at ways to reduce the population in order to limit environmental impact, but that’s a multigenerational commitment. And yes, that is likely to lead to an economic dip - unless we press on with automation (which goes into the other discussion about UBI). Oh yes this fantastical vision you are having of a world where people aren’t needed because robots are going to do everything but we need lots of immigrants to do things too. One is long term inevitability, the other is short term necessity. Sorry, I thought that was obvious to anyone with an ounce of economic nous." A socialist hasn’t thought through the consequences of their actions. Shocker. | |||
" Plus a falling population will be good for the environment. Surely you accept that saving the planet should be prioritised over your wealth. The world absolutely should be looking at ways to reduce the population in order to limit environmental impact, but that’s a multigenerational commitment. And yes, that is likely to lead to an economic dip - unless we press on with automation (which goes into the other discussion about UBI). Oh yes this fantastical vision you are having of a world where people aren’t needed because robots are going to do everything but we need lots of immigrants to do things too. One is long term inevitability, the other is short term necessity. Sorry, I thought that was obvious to anyone with an ounce of economic nous. A socialist hasn’t thought through the consequences of their actions. Shocker." I’m a social democrat. You can Google the difference  | |||
| |||
"Just found out today our Portuguese neighbour is being deported despite paying 4k for a 4 year work visa. He met a British girl in Portugal. Had a child and moved here with her 2 years ago. Applied for citizenship immediately, had to have a written English test end of last year and failed. (I'm dyslexic and Dyscalculia) I would have failed the test, as I did my GCSE exams. He works 6 days a week for a regional building firm, pays all his tax and NI contributions. As does she. They now have 2 children. He is being deported next month and she's going with him with the children. The system stinks! It’s England. People need to be able to speak English otherwise they are no use to us. Of course the biggest problem this country has is the success of the English language. So many people can speak it. They all want to come here because it’s easy. It’s why Japan has been much more successful at maintaining its culture. Japan also has an enormous demographic problem, with an aging population and will face severe economic decline without immigration or a surge in birth rate. Isn't a period of economic decline a reasonable price to pay for not destroying the environment for ever? There had to be a balancing act between protecting the environment long-term (which is a priority for all), but without harming citizens *now*. Immigration doesn’t harm the environment though - unless you mean the cultural environment (which is something that is ever changing anyway) Culture changes anyway doesn't mean it is for good. Some people may not like the cultural changes. The Japanese do not want immigration because they have prioritised preserving their culture over economic growth and material comfort, which is totally fine. And yet they’re now changing their stance on immigration, in response, as previous attempts have failed to recruit the numbers they need. It’s as if immigration is vital in the 21st century, or something. Their low skilled worker visa rules are particularly in favour of people from specific south east Asian countries which are closer to their culture. The other visa allowed was for people earning over 130,000 Euros. Migration is 'vital' for people who care more about material wealth over everything else. So do you think a nation (and as a result its citizens) should suffer declining living standards due to economic failure, rather than have immigrants who maintain (and increase) economic standing? Personally, as I get older I’d like to know that my services are going to continue to be well funded." If that's what the people want, they should be able to do so. If the services you consume are more important to you over the culture that surrounds you, you have the right to fight for it. If the Japanese prioritise things differently, they have the right to do so. There isn't any correct or wrong here. | |||
"Just found out today our Portuguese neighbour is being deported despite paying 4k for a 4 year work visa. He met a British girl in Portugal. Had a child and moved here with her 2 years ago. Applied for citizenship immediately, had to have a written English test end of last year and failed. (I'm dyslexic and Dyscalculia) I would have failed the test, as I did my GCSE exams. He works 6 days a week for a regional building firm, pays all his tax and NI contributions. As does she. They now have 2 children. He is being deported next month and she's going with him with the children. The system stinks! It’s England. People need to be able to speak English otherwise they are no use to us. Of course the biggest problem this country has is the success of the English language. So many people can speak it. They all want to come here because it’s easy. It’s why Japan has been much more successful at maintaining its culture. Japan also has an enormous demographic problem, with an aging population and will face severe economic decline without immigration or a surge in birth rate. Isn't a period of economic decline a reasonable price to pay for not destroying the environment for ever? There had to be a balancing act between protecting the environment long-term (which is a priority for all), but without harming citizens *now*. Immigration doesn’t harm the environment though - unless you mean the cultural environment (which is something that is ever changing anyway) Culture changes anyway doesn't mean it is for good. Some people may not like the cultural changes. The Japanese do not want immigration because they have prioritised preserving their culture over economic growth and material comfort, which is totally fine. And yet they’re now changing their stance on immigration, in response, as previous attempts have failed to recruit the numbers they need. It’s as if immigration is vital in the 21st century, or something. Their low skilled worker visa rules are particularly in favour of people from specific south east Asian countries which are closer to their culture. The other visa allowed was for people earning over 130,000 Euros. Migration is 'vital' for people who care more about material wealth over everything else. So do you think a nation (and as a result its citizens) should suffer declining living standards due to economic failure, rather than have immigrants who maintain (and increase) economic standing? Personally, as I get older I’d like to know that my services are going to continue to be well funded. If that's what the people want, they should be able to do so. If the services you consume are more important to you over the culture that surrounds you, you have the right to fight for it. If the Japanese prioritise things differently, they have the right to do so. There isn't any correct or wrong here." And people make plenty of decisions in life that make them worse off. They have children. They buy pets. They refuse a better job offer because they don’t want to move. They buy a bigger house or car that they probably don’t need. They pay for private schools or health care when they may not need to. Nobody thinks that these decisions are objectively wrong. They are a matter of choice. | |||
"Just found out today our Portuguese neighbour is being deported despite paying 4k for a 4 year work visa. He met a British girl in Portugal. Had a child and moved here with her 2 years ago. Applied for citizenship immediately, had to have a written English test end of last year and failed. (I'm dyslexic and Dyscalculia) I would have failed the test, as I did my GCSE exams. He works 6 days a week for a regional building firm, pays all his tax and NI contributions. As does she. They now have 2 children. He is being deported next month and she's going with him with the children. The system stinks! It’s England. People need to be able to speak English otherwise they are no use to us. Of course the biggest problem this country has is the success of the English language. So many people can speak it. They all want to come here because it’s easy. It’s why Japan has been much more successful at maintaining its culture. Japan also has an enormous demographic problem, with an aging population and will face severe economic decline without immigration or a surge in birth rate. Isn't a period of economic decline a reasonable price to pay for not destroying the environment for ever? There had to be a balancing act between protecting the environment long-term (which is a priority for all), but without harming citizens *now*. Immigration doesn’t harm the environment though - unless you mean the cultural environment (which is something that is ever changing anyway) Culture changes anyway doesn't mean it is for good. Some people may not like the cultural changes. The Japanese do not want immigration because they have prioritised preserving their culture over economic growth and material comfort, which is totally fine. And yet they’re now changing their stance on immigration, in response, as previous attempts have failed to recruit the numbers they need. It’s as if immigration is vital in the 21st century, or something. Their low skilled worker visa rules are particularly in favour of people from specific south east Asian countries which are closer to their culture. The other visa allowed was for people earning over 130,000 Euros. Migration is 'vital' for people who care more about material wealth over everything else. So do you think a nation (and as a result its citizens) should suffer declining living standards due to economic failure, rather than have immigrants who maintain (and increase) economic standing? Personally, as I get older I’d like to know that my services are going to continue to be well funded. If that's what the people want, they should be able to do so. If the services you consume are more important to you over the culture that surrounds you, you have the right to fight for it. If the Japanese prioritise things differently, they have the right to do so. There isn't any correct or wrong here. And people make plenty of decisions in life that make them worse off. They have children. They buy pets. They refuse a better job offer because they don’t want to move. They buy a bigger house or car that they probably don’t need. They pay for private schools or health care when they may not need to. Nobody thinks that these decisions are objectively wrong. They are a matter of choice. " "Worse" in your perspective. Who are you to decide what's good and what's worse for other people? There are plenty of villagers and tribal people who would easily make more money if they go out to cities and work. But they prefer their way of living. Life isn't all about materialism. | |||
"should we judge Our taxes were used to murder innocent people in Afghanistan who had previously been no harm to us, the state tried to cover it up and nobody has gone to prison https://casebook.icrc.org/case-study/united-kingdom-unlawful-killings-afghanistan#:~:text=In%20the%20summer%20of%202022,unarmed%20men%20under%20dubious%20circumstances." Absolutely we should judge. Judging things all the time, situations, other people,things like that is what kept every one of your ancestors alive long enough to breed and ultimately end up with you being here. You should definitely judge people, it's a good thing to do. | |||
| |||
"So they were in a relationship which had broken down. " The police don't have a clue where he is. Could even be in the Thames. | |||
"So they were in a relationship which had broken down. The police don't have a clue where he is. Could even be in the Thames." I could have a good guess but I'd get called an islamophobe or racist | |||
"So they were in a relationship which had broken down. The police don't have a clue where he is. Could even be in the Thames. I could have a good guess but I'd get called an islamophobe or racist" A brother will not turn in another brother to an infidel. | |||
"should we judge Our taxes were used to murder innocent people in Afghanistan who had previously been no harm to us, the state tried to cover it up and nobody has gone to prison https://casebook.icrc.org/case-study/united-kingdom-unlawful-killings-afghanistan#:~:text=In%20the%20summer%20of%202022,unarmed%20men%20under%20dubious%20circumstances." Oh dear, for fuck's sake. There's always going to be some apologist. | |||
"So they were in a relationship which had broken down. The police don't have a clue where he is. Could even be in the Thames. I could have a good guess but I'd get called an islamophobe or racist" On the contrary, according to Nick Ferrari LBC they are converting to Christianity https://www.facebook.com/share/gB8JCnYnLHS6Zzyo/?mibextid=UalRPS | |||
"So they were in a relationship which had broken down. The police don't have a clue where he is. Could even be in the Thames. I could have a good guess but I'd get called an islamophobe or racist On the contrary, according to Nick Ferrari LBC they are converting to Christianity https://www.facebook.com/share/gB8JCnYnLHS6Zzyo/?mibextid=UalRPS" And according to an anonymous 'home office source'. Make of that what you will. | |||
