I was going to lie down on the runway to stop the Rwanda deportations...

[oowee]

14 hours ago, stumfelter said:

Could you manage a couple of Syrians as well? Might not pay so well though...

Pay?? 

13 hours ago, ShootingEgg said:

So it's not a thing that they should seek asylum in the first country they get to?

No. The UN refugee convention does not make this requirement, a position tested and supported by UK case law. 

Edited June 16, 2022 by oowee

[bruno22rf]

I would put money on Farage getting them out if he was PM.

[johnphilip]

43 minutes ago, bruno22rf said:

I would put money on Farage getting them out if he was PM.

+1 from me

[Westward]

There's a  grey area about the legal position. Although they do not have to claim asylum in the first country they pitch up in, there is a potential issue over where they come from. Basically, they do not have an iron clad legal right to claim asylum here if they arrived directly from a "safe country". However, there is of course a raft of organisations that would fight tooth and nail against the government if they refused claims on that basis

As always, there's little that can be done to enforce anything and the migrants and traffickers know that. The traffickers working out of Belgium, The Netherlands, Germany, France etc. are at little risk of arrest as those countries, along with Scandinavia,  don't want the problem of the migrants either.

Only the EU can slow or stop the flow by intercepting them at the borders, but as long as most want to come here (No idea why!), the EU isn't going to be interested.

[Raja Clavata]

23 hours ago, johnphilip said:

How can you process people without any form of ID.

There is a long established framework for this within UNHCR, very comprehensive and a high degree of "correct" outcomes on refugee status determination.

[oowee]

45 minutes ago, Westward said:

 

Only the EU can slow or stop the flow by intercepting them at the borders, but as long as most want to come here (No idea why!), the EU isn't going to be interested.

I dont know where migrants want to go but most certainly don't come to UK.

 

[clangerman]

indeed few migrants do come to the uk rest are criminals or is trying to sneak in by dinghy now legal means of entry 

[discobob]

1 hour ago, Westward said:

However, there is of course a raft of organisations that would fight tooth and nail against the government

I think that whoever is funding these organisations need to be looked at as well

[harkom]

I think that a few small UK craft, crew armed with airguns, patrolling just offshore of Frogland might prove the best deterrent yet.

[bruno22rf]

43 minutes ago, harkom said:

I think that a few small UK craft, crew armed with airguns, patrolling just offshore of Frogland might prove the best deterrent yet.

Not a firearm as you would be arrested, all you need is a 6 foot pole with something sharp on the end.

[Westward]

1 hour ago, oowee said:

I dont know where migrants want to go but most certainly don't come to UK.

 

I don't know what you mean by that. Even the BBC admits that the majority of the boat people crossing the channel are economic migrants rather than genuine asylum seekers.

Our policy of aiding seafarers in trouble means that we are bound to "rescue" them from dangerous inflatables and bring them safely ashore. This means that they become legal rather than illegal migrants.

My question on this is why do the French let them set off in dangerous boats and often enough in bad weather? I think we all know the answer...

[oowee]

3 minutes ago, Westward said:

I don't know what you mean by that. Even the BBC admits that the majority of the boat people crossing the channel are economic migrants rather than genuine asylum seekers.

Our policy of aiding seafarers in trouble means that we are bound to "rescue" them from dangerous inflatables and bring them safely ashore. This means that they become legal rather than illegal migrants.

My question on this is why do the French let them set off in dangerous boats and often enough in bad weather? I think we all know the answer...

Your statement that 'most (refugees) want to come here' is inaccurate. Far more go to other countries than come to the UK. 

[ShootingEgg]

5 hours ago, oowee said:

Pay?? 

No. The UN refugee convention does not make this requirement, a position tested and supported by UK case law. 

The people in dingees are economic migrants not refugees though... 

[johnphilip]

4 hours ago, Raja Clavata said:

There is a long established framework for this within UNHCR, very comprehensive and a high degree of "correct" outcomes on refugee status determination.

Then I will ask again why do these people get rid of there ID . Can you expect to go to any other country without any form of ID .

[oowee]

22 minutes ago, johnphilip said:

Then I will ask again why do these people get rid of there ID . Can you expect to go to any other country without any form of ID .

These people? Who are 'these people'? I am sure there may be some migrants claiming refugee status that would want to dispose of documentation that might prove otherwise but what does it say about us to label all refugees the same? 

Are you asking about all refugees? Surely what ID a person has depends upon their circumstances? 

Unfortunately it's using language such as 'these people' that starts the process of demonising and plays directly into the hands of the extremist. 

 

[Newbie to this]

4 minutes ago, oowee said:

Who are these people?

Exactly, who are these people? We just don't know!

[clangerman]

we know exactly who they are people thatcher would have cleared from the beach in a week while gump can’t clear them to save his life! 

[johnphilip]

4 minutes ago, oowee said:

These people? Who are 'these people'? I am sure there may be some migrants claiming refugee status that would want to dispose of documentation that might prove otherwise but what does it say about us to label all refugees the same? 

Are you asking about all refugees? Surely what ID a person has depends upon their circumstances? 

Unfortunately it's using language such as 'these people' that starts the process of demonising and plays directly into the hands of the extremist. 

 

We don't know who " these people " are hence the term " these people "  for want of having to repeat myself , you can not expect to go to another country without any form of ID. 

Strange they can loose there ID but still are well dressed  don't look starved  nor unkept lots with mobile phones  pay lots of money to sail over the channel putting lives at risk and taken the odd child with them ,

What causes extremist issues is the fact that nothing is been done about these types of crossing, and the arrogance  of them as they come ashore .

Our government  has put a  plan forward to sort this problem . Now they are all saying they are Gay . The country they were been flown to does not have a problem  with gay people . So what gives them the right to refuse to be flown there were they won't be judgement  against  them . There legal people need to come up with other ideas  ,all the while make a lot of money from this .

[oowee]

11 minutes ago, clangerman said:

we know exactly who they are people thatcher would have cleared from the beach in a week while gump can’t clear them to save his life! 

 

11 minutes ago, johnphilip said:

We don't know who " these people " are hence the term " these people "  for want of having to repeat myself , you can not expect to go to another country without any form of ID. 

Strange they can loose there ID but still are well dressed  don't look starved  nor unkept lots with mobile phones  pay lots of money to sail over the channel putting lives at risk and taken the odd child with them ,

What causes extremist issues is the fact that nothing is been done about these types of crossing, and the arrogance  of them as they come ashore .

Our government  has put a  plan forward to sort this problem . Now they are all saying they are Gay . The country they were been flown to does not have a problem  with gay people . So what gives them the right to refuse to be flown there were they won't be judgement  against  them . There legal people need to come up with other ideas  ,all the while make a lot of money from this .

 

28 minutes ago, Newbie to this said:

Exactly, who are these people? We just don't know!

Politics has become more technocratic. The old ties between groups of people (the right and the left) and traditional parties is strained as leaders struggle to adapt to the new information filled world. The financial crash of 2008 is still with us, the gap between rich and poor is increasing, general living standards decline as we fail to compete on the world stage and we look for those to blame. Migrants, the EU or our leaders. 

Our leaders now show disdain for the norms of political life, breaking the law with impunity, forcing advisers out of office that hold them to account.  Resurrecting old enemies of the people like refugees, and the EU as a rallying cry to rally the people.  Demonise and inflate hatred amongst the population to deflect from the reality of their inability to make real change within the complex environment that is the world today.

Proposals to opt out of the Human Rights framework would be the next step so that we can expel 'these people' from our hallowed country. It sounds more like Germany of the 30's every day the only thing missing is a war. 

[johnphilip]

7 minutes ago, oowee said:

 

 

Politics has become more technocratic. The old ties between groups of people (the right and the left) and traditional parties is strained as leaders struggle to adapt to the new information filled world. The financial crash of 2008 is still with us, the gap between rich and poor is increasing, general living standards decline as we fail to compete on the world stage and we look for those to blame. Migrants, the EU or our leaders. 

Our leaders now show disdain for the norms of political life, breaking the law with impunity, forcing advisers out of office that hold them to account.  Resurrecting old enemies of the people like refugees, and the EU as a rallying cry to rally the people.  Demonise and inflate hatred amongst the population to deflect from the reality of their inability to make real change within the complex environment that is the world today.

Proposals to opt out of the Human Rights framework would be the next step so that we can expel 'these people' from our hallowed country. It sounds more like Germany of the 30's every day the only thing missing is a war. 

 

[oowee]

Exactly my point. The organisations that we fund to protect the rights of individuals to prevent us slipping back into the abys of hatred and demonisation are to be bullied into submission. 

The advisers that are appointed to Govt to ensure compliance and and standards are forced out of office. 

It's all part of a slippery slope.

Lets have a proper conversation and set a course of action that is both carrot and stick. Lets not use refugees to deflect from the inadequacies of govt. 

[johnphilip]

6 minutes ago, oowee said:

Exactly my point. The organisations that we fund to protect the rights of individuals to prevent us slipping back into the abys of hatred and demonisation are to be bullied into submission. 

The advisers that are appointed to Govt to ensure compliance and and standards are forced out of office. 

It's all part of a slippery slope.

Lets have a proper conversation and set a course of action that is both carrot and stick. Lets not use refugees to deflect from the inadequacies of govt. 

Did you watch all the video , we have left the EU , we are trying to apply a process to these people who are coming here illegaly . To be processed  in an up and coming country were these people can start a new life . Our government  is trying to do something  about the problem . A problem that is not of our making, Do not compare us to a Germany of the 30s , that is very extreme  views  in your case . And find it very insulting to be honest , 

The longer this goes on the worse it will become.  Europe  is not bothered about them coming here , as they are no longer there problem. 

 

[oowee]

6 minutes ago, johnphilip said:

Did you watch all the video , we have left the EU , we are trying to apply a process to these people who are coming here illegaly . To be processed  in an up and coming country were these people can start a new life . Our government  is trying to do something  about the problem . A problem that is not of our making, Do not compare us to a Germany of the 30s , that is very extreme  views  in your case . And find it very insulting to be honest , 

The longer this goes on the worse it will become.  Europe  is not bothered about them coming here , as they are no longer there problem. 

 

The United Nations has nothing to do with the EU. The UNHCR was established specifically to deal with displaced persons after the second world war. It was set up in part by Britain to deal with mass displacement and avoid the demonisation of displaced people and ensure standards. This is exactly what it is doing now. Just because it does not accord with what the Government wants to do is one of the the reasons why it was created in the first place. If we abandon organisations like UNHCR and the ECHR we are undoing the very mechanisms that were established to avoid repeating the errors of the past. 

European countries are not bothered because the numbers are insignificant and far less than many have already taken. Europe struggles to deal with a government that cannot be trusted. A Government that breaks agreements it has just made.

It will not end in the short to medium term it's part of the process of balancing areas of pressure. This Government is incapable of resolving the issue because it cannot have an honest conversation with its electorate. It does not have the time to establish and put in place a system of management. 

[mick miller]

My advisory approach to anything the UNHCR wishes to do is to do the complete opposite, being as how it is simply an extension of globalist corporate policy and has nothing to do with 'uniting nations'. I don't choose these people to speak on my behalf, so they can, quite unkindly, **** off.

 

Edited June 17, 2022 by mick miller

[Raja Clavata]

Good posts Grant!

18 hours ago, johnphilip said:

Then I will ask again why do these people get rid of there ID . Can you expect to go to any other country without any form of ID .

Economic migrants sure but can you even begin to imagine the hell of being a displaced person, think of the scenarios that might make it just a tad difficult to collect your ID, keep your ID when you've either lost everything (there's a clue there) or left you home hurriedly.

There's at least two sides to the extremist point / risk, blindly concurring with Priti Patel could be seen as pretty extremist from certain perspectives...

15 minutes ago, mick miller said:

My advisory approach to anything the UNHCR wishes to do is to do the complete opposite, being as how it is simply an extension of globalist corporate policy and has nothing to do with 'uniting nations'. I don't choose these people to speak on my behalf, so they can, quite unkindly, **** off.

 

Wow, just wow. You can't seriously mean anything they do you completely oppose, that's a bit, err - extreme.