Channel Migrants

[Rewulf]

34 minutes ago, oowee said:

You have to blame the Serbs for this one offering visa free travel to Iran was maybe not a smart move.

Just compounding the problem really, but a direct cause ?

https://www.rferl.org/a/serbia-abolishes-visa-free-travel-iranians-citing-abuses-by-some-migrants-to-eu-/29539329.html

I doubt it somehow.

Heres my take on it.
If someone said to you, how much money would it take for you to cross the Channel, in an inflatable boat, at night , in winter, with your family ?
Yet these people PAY someone 1000s to do it !

Is it beyond the realms of fantasy to apply for a holiday type visa to travel to the UK from Iran and simply fly in, say you are visiting relatives, fictitious or otherwise, surely if the reason you want to come here in the first place is because you know someone already here, someone who could vouch for you, THEN claim asylum ?
'Friend' drives to France via Chunnel, sticks you in the boot on return , or swaps you out with another passenger ?
I can think of lots of ways to get in with 'inside help' and a whole lot safer too.

The whole crossing the Channel thing in a rubber dinghy  just sounds ludicrous !

[Old farrier]

[Rewulf]

But..but... we NEED  these illegal migrants to pay taxes for our pensions , dont we ? 🤣

[pinfireman]

On 03/01/2019 at 11:46, Rewulf said:

Im going to have a little rant....

Not so much about Channel migrants, but more about the soros funded paragon of our collective moral compass, Afua Hirsch.

Her latest Guardian column piece starts off with a gut churning assault on Christmas.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jan/03/britain-migrant-crisis-sajid-javid-hypocrisy

Apparently 'We HAVE to tell our children, that a bearded man breaks into our house and watches us while we sleep, we also have to have a conversation about a virgins womb, and talk about a genocidal king who murders young boys'
Whilst I am known for my occasional dark humour, I cant  recall ever having this conversation with my kids, and can conclude that, if Ms  Hirsch talks to her young daughter about such things, Christmas in her household must be a right hoot !

The Christmas link is to lead her onto the 'fact' that the baby Jesus and his family were soon to become refugees, and thats why we should let anyone who wants to, come to this country , and settle.
She missed a trick here, she could have drawn similarities with the EU (Roman empire) and Viktor Orban (Herod) and the holy family fleeing to a 'safe' country , errr ... Egypt.

She also points out we also have a moral, and legal obligation to accept asylum claims to any who reach our shores.
Legally trained Hirsch, misses out the bit about claiming asylum in the first safe country as being a requirement to a successful claim.
Obviously believing there is some arcane portal between France and x number of war torn countries.

Whilst most of the Channel hoppers seem to be Iranian,  and I salute their bravery at crossing one of the busiest shipping lanes in the world, in inflatables , in winter, it makes you wonder why they chose this particular method, and why they just didnt claim in France ?
France has a long association with Iran, and by and large , most people of Persian descent are educated and hard working, an asset to a country.
So why risk that ridiculously perilous crossing, to pay that money, to stand a good chance of your asylum claim being rejected, what is the draw ?
I understand they may have family here, but that doesnt do you a lot of good if you are drowned, or mown down by a container ship in the dark.

Ms Hirsch points her Ghanaian/British/Norwegian/Jewish finger at Sajid Javid, basically calling him a racist, pandering to racists.
Berating him for calling them exactly what they are, illegal immigrants.
She then takes aim at all of us for being racially 'hostile'

"The truth is that Britain’s stance towards migrants has never had much to do with reason and everything to do with a cultural hostility that stretches back centuries. In just one example highlighted in a new book on Brexit and the end of empire, Rule Britannia, an 1893 magazine described immigrants and foreigners as “deceitful, effeminate, irreligious, immoral, unclean and unwholesome. Any one Englishman is a match for any seven of them.”

 

Well that covers it then according to Ms Hirsch, we are summed up by a publication, that no one read, no one living remembers, written 120 years ago !
She has a peculiar, some might say delusional obsession with Britains colonial past, from wanting to tear down Nelsons column , to wanting to change the landscape of our national identity, to make us ashamed of who we are.
Im no psychologist ,, but I think its Ms Hirsch who is ashamed of who she is, and this is why she has so much hatred for the world she lives in.

She is an idiot! Sadly, an idiot living here, in a well paid "job"....but why be surprised, it,s in the Guardian, a newspaper only fit for use in an outdoor privy lacking toilet paper!

On 03/01/2019 at 12:06, JDog said:

Farage also believes that Soros is funding the EU's anti UK stance to such an extent that the EU may collapse if the funding was withdrawn.

Like or loathe him, he is rarely wrong regarding the EU.................

On 03/01/2019 at 12:17, Newbie to this said:

These people are nothing more than criminals, they are trying to get to the UK and their approach is to break our law to do it. Why should we ever entertain accepting anyone who breaks our law to get here, they have already shown no respect to the UK or it's laws, so why do we think they will ever respect our laws?

Entering the UK by any other means than the legal way, should mean that you will never be accepted here.

Correct!

[pinfireman]

On 03/01/2019 at 15:53, Hamster said:

It will never get any better, not until the West stops bombing, destabilising and/or placing sanctions on the various countries that keep producing these refugees as well as a large percentage of economic migrants.

You will never accept the root causes lie with yourselves but spend five minutes thinking about each individual country and/or ethnicity and it soon becomes clear they are overwhelmingly from countries that the West (which means murikkka, UK, France, Canada, Israel, among others) have either directly and physically attacked and often totally destroyed, (Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Palestine, Libya, Yemen, etc,) or ones that have been under sanctions (often illegal/unilateral) for forty years plus as is the case with Iran for instance. The latter has a tremendously well educated population and is easily capable of sustaining its own population through selling the many hundreds of things it can produce IF it were allowed to trade without sanctions. Iranians have been migrating to murikkkka, France, Germany and the UK for FORTY years so it's not a recent phenomenon, the reason is quite simple, "you" have made their lives miserable by destabilising their region and placing trading sanctions on them for decades, JCPOA was meant to stop that but murikkka/Israel soon saw to it that normal service was resumed.

It is what the West has and does best, stop non Europeans from modernising and getting a foothold on industrialisation, China is of course a notable exception because it has always been difficult to tame (opium years notwithstanding)  .

I'm afraid there is no polite way to say this but you reap what you sow, have a laugh at me and call me XYZ, nothing I wouldn't have heard for decades 😋  😇 it will make you feel smug for a few minutes but it won't fix anything. Ever wondered why all these Arab dictatorships with zero "Democracy" and abysmal human/women's rights records seem to have wonderful economies and none of their people want to leave, eg, (Sawdi Arabia, UAE, Kuwait, Bahrain, Egypt, Jordan, Qatar, Oman, etc,) ? Well it's because you haven't bombed them or placed them under sanctions or destabilised them, why ? Because they agree to the West's dictates and buy TRILLIONS of arms from you. 

Bomb/sanction them, they will flee and some will end up here, it's simple maths. Does our collective futures look good for our children ? Realistically no, war used to be the answer to everything but things have moved on and the West will eventually pick on the wrong people (thinking specifically China/Russia) here, then and only then when real misery is tasted will the West learn it's no longer in a position to bully/dominate. 

Sorry for the rude interjection, lets get back to making jokes about drowning these economic migrants by under water drones equipped with mini charges. 😴  😶

Interesting rant, but does not get away from the fact that  all "asylum seekers" must, under United Nations Charter, seek asylum in the FIRST SAFE COUNTRY they arrive in.............not cross a dozen of them to turn up here! The vast majority are either young men ducking their responsibilties in their homeland, or ECONOMIC MIGRANTS! Whichever category, they are here ILLEGALLY! As such, they should be returned to their homeland.  This country is FULL UP!

23 hours ago, timmytree said:

Absolutely correct. When Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait we should have stayed well away. The bloke may have been a nutter but don't forget he was keeping all the other nutters in his country under control. Everywhere we meddle we make things worse for ourselves. Read about Winston Churchills early life, he describes the situation perfectly. I won't print details on here because some would say it's racist or similar.

If Saddam had remained in Kuwait, he would have had a stranglehold on the supply of oil to the West....US!  After Kuwait, it would have been the UAE and their oilfields!

23 hours ago, Newbie to this said:

Where did someone say that? I've just re-read all of the comments and couldn't find one that was saying drown them!

I know....it,s the usual garbage from certain quarters!

[pinfireman]

23 hours ago, Hamster said:

Saddam was Iran's worst enemy, the Western "proxy" war cost a million lives on each side but by attacking Iraq in the way that the coalition did (with such fictitious reasons) and the damage that it caused has now meant that many Iraqi's openly accept Iranian presence in their country in preference to anyone from the West because they have come to know the real enemy was selling them the arms for their oil money. 

Fictitious" reasons?  I doubt many Kuwaitis would agree with you!

23 hours ago, Rewulf said:

I dont doubt for one moment that the lives of people living in Afghan ,Iran, Iraq, Pakistan, Libya and most of Africa , are not as good as ours, by accident of birth, we will probably never know the horrors of what some face on a daily basis.
But is it fair to say that its all the fault of the west ?

Did we create tribalism, did we propagate the centuries old battle between Sunni and Shia, did we invent Wahabism ?
Yes weve extracted and continue to extract resources from the ME and Africa, did that cause the Rwandan genocide ?
Yes we interfered in Libya, but why is half of central Africa thinking its got every right to come to Europe, the migrants being picked up from the Med arent Libyan, they are sub Saharan.
The migrants coming over from Turkey and walking through Greece to Europe arent all Syrian, they are Pakistani, Indians, Indonesians and Africans.

I dont have any problem with genuine refugees, but the bandwagon has got that big now, its become an international business.
Part of that business is trafficking , part is about destabilising certain countries, its working too.
The rise of the far right puts us back around 100 years, growing resentment, economic uncertainty , civil unrest and a looming recession ?
Sound familiar ?

Why is Europe doing such a bad job of dealing with mass migration ?
Is it blatant ineptitude or deliberate ?
Ive often spoken about Sweden and its serious problem with migrants, over 10 % of Swedens population are 3rd world migrants, crime has skyrocketed, most are unemployed and on benefits.
Sweden shares the rare distinction of being the only country in the world that has a wiki page dedicated to its extensive grenade attacks over the past 5 years, over 200 and counting.
Yet no one wants to confront the issue, least of all address it.
Brush it under the carpet, just in case you offend someone.

Londons criminality among 1st and 2nd generation migrant youth, again , not spoken about in that context in case someone uses the R word.

Whichever way you want to look at it, we have enough trouble , economic and domestic to last us a generation, if we got a government in today, that was prepared to do what is necessary , its still going to take 10 -20 years to sort out.
What you dont need, is another 2-3 million 3rd world migrants to compound it in that time.

So when you get a government minister who takes a hard line view on illegal entry, I tend to stick up for them.
Especially when it comes to the rantings of SJW Hirsch, an Oxford educated campaigner who has never known hardship or poverty.
Ivory towers are never a good place to shout from about poverty and injustice.

Brilliant!

21 hours ago, guzzicat said:

Seemed to pretty well blame the U.K

Correct! I,m trying to find a post, past and present, where he has stuck up for the UK ! 

[pinfireman]

21 hours ago, Hamster said:

I blamed the West in its puppet entirety for the refugee/migrant "crisis" , I have never claimed they should have cart blanche access : 

 

You are quite correct, unfortunately people like Hamster seem keen to invite them all in.

I was listening to a radio discussion on this subject and apparently there is no such law, refugees don't have to apply for refugee status in the first country they happen to get to, it appears the UK was an important partner/signatory to this effect. Tis but another one of those loose and baseless one liners that gets thrown around it seems. 

It,s in the United Nations Charter! 

16 hours ago, Rewulf said:

Claim asylum in the UK

Contents

1. Overview
2. Eligibility
3. Documents you must provide
4. Register your asylum claim
5. After your screening
6. Asylum interview
7. Get a decision
8. Help you can get
9. If you're under 18

Eligibility

To stay in the UK as a refugee you must be unable to live safely in any part of your own country because you fear persecution there.

If you’re stateless, your own country is the country you usually live in.

This persecution must be because of:

• your race
• your religion
• your nationality
• your political opinion
• anything else that puts you at risk because of the social, cultural, religious or political situation in your country, for example, your gender, gender identity or sexual orientation

You must have failed to get protection from authorities in your own country.

Your claim might not be considered if you:

• are from an EU country
• have a connection with another country you can claim asylum in, for example if you’ve claimed asylum in an EU country before arriving in the UK

Family members

You can include your partner and your children under 18 as ‘dependants’ in your application if they’re with you in the UK.

Your children under 18 and your partner can also make their own applications at the same time, but they will not be treated as your dependants.

That,s a good read for Hamster!

[pinfireman]

6 hours ago, Hamster said:

A little off the track but it might be useful to the overall picture if we take an example or two from our own specialist subject of shooting; earlier in the week I chanced upon a thread on a FB fieldsports group where someone asked whether the fact he'd seen a shooter taking shots at deer from the roadside constituted an offence. Must admit my own initial reaction was the "50 foot" malarkey and of course the great majority of replies were quick to point this out as well as go on tirades about "poaching" and "should have reported him" etc, etc, as is often the case though eventually one or two people with actual knowledge of the finer points of law interjected and one even said he'd been doing so with police approval for a very long time. So you see, it's perfectly possible for myths to become part and parcel of our accepted shooting folklore, indeed I have personally had much fun exploding many such  falsehoods over the years. 

Another one is when for example we hear a panel of "experts" assembled who have an innate dislike of guns who use emotive, misleading language to get the public riled up and on their side. I well remember one such discussion where an idiot said something along the lines of : parful airguns can be purchased by anyone and together with steel headed ammo these can easily be used to kill people...............................luckily there was (MY if memory serves) an actual expert present who tried to explain that airguns power is measured via their ft lbs energy; that "Prometheus" pellets were no more parful than lead pellets when this is measured using scientific techniques - guess which remark the public remembers over time, guess which narrative the msm will use when it suits them, same goes for the subject of immigrants/refugees. 

The man who spoke on the radio was an ACTUAL current immigration lawyer, he sounded native if that makes a difference, and he said the notion is false. 

and who pays the "immigration" lawyers.....no illegal immigrants, no lawyers! The illegals get a form of Legal Aid, which WE pay for....and some of the highest paid lawyers in this land are immigration lawyers! So it,s a one-sided view.

[Hamster]

51 minutes ago, pinfireman said:

 

I know....it,s the usual garbage from certain quarters!

Quote

Great white shark breeding program somewhere in the channel. 

Didn't have to wait too long for the sort of comment I was talking about to surface 😉 , perhaps you ought to read through the whole thread first before jumping in with your size elevens. 

51 minutes ago, pinfireman said:

Interesting rant, but does not get away from the fact that  all "asylum seekers" must, under United Nations Charter, seek asylum in the FIRST SAFE COUNTRY they arrive in.............not cross a dozen of them to turn up here! The vast majority are either young men ducking their responsibilties in their homeland, or ECONOMIC MIGRANTS! Whichever category, they are here ILLEGALLY! As such, they should be returned to their homeland.  This country is FULL UP!

 

Again, word of advice, perhaps make a habit of reading through the whole thread so you don't look silly. 😉

45 minutes ago, pinfireman said:

Fictitious" reasons?  I doubt many Kuwaitis would agree with you!

Correct! I,m trying to find a post, past and present, where he has stuck up for the UK ! 

I was talking about the illegal invasion AFTER 9/11-WMD-30 minute ability to strike by Saddam, a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. 

Sorry I don't do mindless sucking up like some expats are prone to 😉, if it walks, quacks and acts like a duck I'll say so, if and when you stop following US/Israel foreign policy (to the detriment of world as well as our own Peace) I will be the first to salute the government. 

Edited January 4, 2019 by Hamster

[Hamster]

41 minutes ago, pinfireman said:

and who pays the "immigration" lawyers.....no illegal immigrants, no lawyers! The illegals get a form of Legal Aid, which WE pay for....and some of the highest paid lawyers in this land are immigration lawyers! So it,s a one-sided view.

The Law is the Law, there are no sides just the factuality that refugees do not HAVE to seek refugee status in the first country they get to. If you'd read through the whole thread you'd have understood that I oppose willy nilly migration into this country so you're preaching to the converted there. 

48 minutes ago, pinfireman said:

It,s in the United Nations Charter! 

That,s a good read for Hamster!

I can't be bothered to google a picture of Jean Luc Picard holding his head and rolling his eyes, can you do me a favour and imagine it. 

Edited January 4, 2019 by Hamster

[oowee]

3 hours ago, Rewulf said:

Just compounding the problem really, but a direct cause ?

https://www.rferl.org/a/serbia-abolishes-visa-free-travel-iranians-citing-abuses-by-some-migrants-to-eu-/29539329.html

I doubt it somehow.

Heres my take on it.
If someone said to you, how much money would it take for you to cross the Channel, in an inflatable boat, at night , in winter, with your family ?
Yet these people PAY someone 1000s to do it !

Is it beyond the realms of fantasy to apply for a holiday type visa to travel to the UK from Iran and simply fly in, say you are visiting relatives, fictitious or otherwise, surely if the reason you want to come here in the first place is because you know someone already here, someone who could vouch for you, THEN claim asylum ?
'Friend' drives to France via Chunnel, sticks you in the boot on return , or swaps you out with another passenger ?
I can think of lots of ways to get in with 'inside help' and a whole lot safer too.

The whole crossing the Channel thing in a rubber dinghy  just sounds ludicrous !

There was reported something like 25,000 visits to Serbia and around only around 18000 returned. Once in Serbia its a train and dinghy ride to Dover. It also looks like the dinghy's are supported on route. I would think twice about crossing the channel in a small yacht at night (and I am a sailor).

When shortly after the Serbian, Iranian visa fiasco we have an influx of dinghy migrants from Iran to the shores of the UK it would suggest to me a strong relationship between the two events. 

Getting a visa to come to the UK would be very difficult for exactly the reason you quote. It is now illegal when visiting Iran to enter the house of a resident even if invited and that is part of the process of making it hard to get invites and contacts. 

Iran looks a great place to visit I am starting to look at putting a trip together 

[pinfireman]

3 hours ago, Hamster said:

Didn't have to wait too long for the sort of comment I was talking about to surface 😉 , perhaps you ought to read through the whole thread first before jumping in with your size elevens. 

Again, word of advice, perhaps make a habit of reading through the whole thread so you don't look silly. 😉

I was talking about the illegal invasion AFTER 9/11-WMD-30 minute ability to strike by Saddam, a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. 

Sorry I don't do mindless sucking up like some expats are prone to 😉, if it walks, quacks and acts like a duck I'll say so, if and when you stop following US/Israel foreign policy (to the detriment of world as well as our own Peace) I will be the first to salute the government. 

And perhaps you should spend less time following Corbyn,s policies?

[Newbie to this]

I think this has a lot to do with illegals wanting to come to the UK.

https://www.gov.uk/asylum-support/what-youll-get

I don't blame the illegals, I blame policies like that in the link.

[oowee]

37 minutes ago, Newbie to this said:

I think this has a lot to do with illegals wanting to come to the UK.

https://www.gov.uk/asylum-support/what-youll-get

I don't blame the illegals, I blame policies like that in the link.

The policy is for asylum seekers not illegals. Illegals by definition will not get the benefit of the policy.

[Hamster]

1 hour ago, pinfireman said:

And perhaps you should spend less time following Corbyn,s policies?

 

[Newbie to this]

8 minutes ago, oowee said:

The policy is for asylum seekers not illegals. Illegals by definition will not get the benefit of the policy.

Which they will all be claiming if they get here.

And even if they are found out to be illegals, they will still get the following

Quote

If you’ve been refused asylum

You’ll be given:

 - somewhere to live

 - £35.39 per person on a payment card for food, clothing and toiletries

You won’t be given:

 - the payment card if you don’t take the offer of somewhere to live

 - any money

Quote

If you’ve been refused asylum

You can apply for a one-off £250 maternity payment if your baby is due in 8 weeks or less or if your baby is under 6 weeks old.

Quote

Healthcare

You may get free National Health Service (NHS) healthcare, such as to see a doctor or get hospital treatment.

You’ll also get:

 - free prescriptions for medicine

 - free dental care for your teeth

 - free eyesight tests

 - help paying for glasses

 -  Education

Your children must attend school if they are aged 5 to 17. All state schools are free and your children may be able to get free school meals.

 

[Vince Green]

8 hours ago, oowee said:

The policy is for asylum seekers not illegals. Illegals by definition will not get the benefit of the policy.

Any illegal can claim asylum, even if the basis of the claim is ridiculously untenable it will still take years to go through the system with appeal after appeal racking up thousands in legal aid. During the whole of that process the claimant is entitled to free housing and full benefits.

Even if the claim is ultimately rejected it is still less than likely that the Home Office would ever get round to deporting them  

[old man]

2 hours ago, Vince Green said:

Any illegal can claim asylum, even if the basis of the claim is ridiculously untenable it will still take years to go through the system with appeal after appeal racking up thousands in legal aid. During the whole of that process the claimant is entitled to free housing and full benefits.

Even if the claim is ultimately rejected it is still less than likely that the Home Office would ever get round to deporting them  

Absolutely correct. 

[oowee]

4 hours ago, Vince Green said:

Any illegal can claim asylum, even if the basis of the claim is ridiculously untenable it will still take years to go through the system with appeal after appeal racking up thousands in legal aid. During the whole of that process the claimant is entitled to free housing and full benefits.

Even if the claim is ultimately rejected it is still less than likely that the Home Office would ever get round to deporting them  

How do you know that?

[Dougy]

I wonder if the government are aware that these immigrants (illegal or not) are taking the Mick? 

Is it worth letting them know. 

[sportsbob]

1 minute ago, Dougy said:

I wonder if the government are aware that these immigrants (illegal or not) are taking the Mick? 

Is it worth letting them know. 

😂😂

[Rewulf]

1 hour ago, oowee said:

How do you know that?

This is the problem, no one 'knows' due to the fact that they are here illegally and unrecorded.
The estimates of how many illegal immigrants ranges from 430,000 to 1.1 million, depending on who you ask.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/immigration-statistics-october-to-december-2017/how-many-people-are-detained-or-returned

Around 35,000 migrants are deported per year, but this includes EU nationals, whilst Migration watch estimates some 100,000 non EU migrants either over stay their visa or enter illegally by stowaway or fake ID.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1020032/uk-migration-watch-illegal-migrants-britain-migrant

Bear in mind NET migration is still around 280,000 per year with roughly half of those being EU nationals, thats an awful lot of people to monitor, if they even try ?
We only started monitoring who left in 2015, after the last labour government stopped it.

Whichever way you want to look at it, deportations are very low compared to influx of non EU persons who have entered illegally or overstayed visas.

 

[Vince Green]

1 hour ago, Dougy said:

I wonder if the government are aware that these immigrants (illegal or not) are taking the Mick? 

Is it worth letting them know. 

That's a good idea, now why didn't I think of that

[flynny]

On 4 January 2019 at 10:55, Dougy said:

Great white shark breeding program somewhere in the channel. 

 

Love it

[Dougy]

39 minutes ago, Vince Green said:

That's a good idea, now why didn't I think of that

Not another one, lol there not all in the commons then.