Small Boats etc solution

[Trickytreesreds]

I like this guy, he's one of my favourite bloggers.

He sums up the stance perfectly and the dumb left not understanding the issues at hand.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XZSz0N8Nkm8

[Andy_Faber]

So everyone who's expressed an interest says no to open borders. Ignoring the how, what's the who? start ith who should NOT be allowed to stay? To help you Tricky, assume there's a 'holding pen' in France if you want, although I'd rather have a 'we are where we are' answer

[ramAnag]

Whoa, you need to explain that.
Untermensch, what a snotty answer that is.
How is calling for proper border controls in line with untermensch?

Thats low even for you. In fact its another slur to rival the usual racist/nazi/gammon/little englander the left normally resort to, to win an argument.
Congratulations, you've surpassed the conversation.

‘Snotty answer’...‘low even for you’...now, coming from you of all people, that’s funny!

‘Untermensch’, defined in ‘30’s Germany as ‘inferior people’ or ‘the masses from the East’, i.e. the Jews, the Slavs, the Roma. A term further applied to those of mixed race, those who were black and those who were mentally and/or physically disabled. Basically all those who those in power in Germany at the time we have been speaking of regarded as sub human.

Ring any bells compared with the rhetoric of today? It’s what the newly reinstated Mr. Lineker was talking about and in answer to your particularly daft question...of course, ‘calling for proper border controls’ has nothing to do with it. They are quite separate.

I’m sorry if you feel the need to add it to you list of forbidden words when describing current government attitudes. Incidentally...you might like to look up the meaning of ‘surpassed’.

[MadAmster]

Answering questions is never easy. My answer is yes and no.

No? The borders shouldn't be open to all and sundry. There has to be a process in place. Unfortunately, HMG has orchestrated a system whereby it's damned nigh impossible for these people to apply for asylum in the UK. Some of them still believe the streets are paved with gold. Others don't speak any of the EU languages but speak English and/or have friends/relatives in the UK. They really should be applying for asylum at their local UK Embassy/Consulate, if possible. Very often it's not. Failing that, HMG should have systems in place inside the EU where people can apply for asylum. They pass we bring them over. They fail, they go elsewhere. Unfortunately, all the failures will then try the small boat route.

Yes, there will, more than likely, always be people trying the small boat route. Those people, if one is humane, can't be left floating (or sinking) on the high seas. Those you need to bring in, if you are a civilised society. Those who manage to reach the shore, take them in. They should be put up in very basic accommodation like old, disused army barracks etc. Asylum requests should be, as TTR says, be dealt with inside 2 weeks. I realise that such a term would mean employing many more Border Force staff. Those that get accepted stay. Those that don't get deported. The trouble there is that HMG has repatriation "contracts" with Albania, Albania and Albania along with Rwanda. Give failed asylum seekers a choice of where they wish to go. Their home country, Rwanda or a safe country in their home region. All of course dependent on their chosen country being prepared to take them in.

Our, natural, civilised and humane way of thinking makes us vulnerable to folk who refuse to make that choice, in which case it might be decided for them.

Personally, if I was in their position and wanted to come to the UK, I'd probably go the boat route and destroy my passport. The current rules and processes, or, to be more exact, the lack thereof, would dictate that to be my best option. Basically, I understand it. That does not say I condone it.

TTR, Poland? Really? They may be somewhat reticent to take in people from Africa/Asia, however, they are currently housing in excess of 5 million Ukrainians. They are doing their bit, IMO.

Apparently, Rwanda isn't scaring people from taking to the boats. They know it's a possibility but they are prepared to take the risk. Will that remain the case once half a dozen flights of deportees have taken place? Depends on how desperate they are...

[ramAnag]

Answering questions is never easy. My answer is yes and no.

No? The borders shouldn't be open to all and sundry. There has to be a process in place. Unfortunately, HMG has orchestrated a system whereby it's damned nigh impossible for these people to apply for asylum in the UK. Some of them still believe the streets are paved with gold. Others don't speak any of the EU languages but speak English and/or have friends/relatives in the UK. They really should be applying for asylum at their local UK Embassy/Consulate, if possible. Very often it's not. Failing that, HMG should have systems in place inside the EU where people can apply for asylum. They pass we bring them over. They fail, they go elsewhere. Unfortunately, all the failures will then try the small boat route.

Yes, there will, more than likely, always be people trying the small boat route. Those people, if one is humane, can't be left floating (or sinking) on the high seas.

Well put, MA. Of course it might be beneficial if we had a more united Europe...you know if we, one of the wealthiest three countries in the continent, were part of some sort of political and economic European union. Oh hang on!

[Geoff Parkstone]

Not bad rA, under 3 pages of comments and you've turned it back to your favourite hobby horse of Br****. Somewhat narcissistic don't you think?

[ramAnag]

Not bad rA, under 3 pages of comments and you've turned it back to your favourite hobby horse of Br****. Somewhat narcissistic don't you think?

Lol...well they are related, GP. In Venn diagram terms (not my strength I know!)...I suspect the overlap between the most vociferous Brexiteers and those most enraged by asylum seekers must be very striking.

[Trickytreesreds]

So everyone who's expressed an interest says no to open borders. Ignoring the how, what's the who? start ith who should NOT be allowed to stay? To help you Tricky, assume there's a 'holding pen' in France if you want, although I'd rather have a 'we are where we are' answer

Who doesn't qualify?

Firstly, I have a problem with anyone who has already travelled thousands of miles, usually spending a lot of money to criminals, to get this far.
They undermine their case of persecution and need safety. By not asking for help in many countries they have passed through, its cherry picking.
However, lets try an over look that.

1. Anyone who has failed in an application in Europe, or been ejected for criminal activity
2. Anyone without papers of some sort, gets treated as non urgent or turned away completely.
3. Non combatant countries ( Vietnams/India/Pakistan/Tunisia/Egypt/Nigeria) you get the drift. The Albanians make a good example of this, as does boat loads of Sikh men recently filmed, from India
4. Proven criminals / wanted criminals/ members of terror groups ( see point 2)
5. Economic migrants

To counter, what do I want to see.
1. During the Syria flare up, Cameron came up with a great idea for me. We would select from the Camps in Turkey, those vetted and most vulnerable. The women/children/ infirm that can't hop on off lorries and have a jolly across the channel
2. Assuming you have an agreed quota.
Seperate the 2 classes- refugees and asylum seekers.
Both have to be treated differently. For example, Ukranians are refugees and want to/ will be sent home asap. A Afghan Interpreter is obviously going to need full asylum, as I doubt he is going home in his/her lifetime
3. your off shore application centre can then help fill in the gaps missing in your quota with more less vulnerable, as long as they qualify as true refugees from identified countries.

I know it still has gaps, but at the moment, the piss is ripped out the system and it has crashed into the mess we are in now.
We need to filter out the real con artists first and deal with the miniscule details later.
The longer this goes, the harder it is to help the real needy in all of this farce.

[Trickytreesreds]

‘Snotty answer’...‘low even for you’...now, coming from you of all people, that’s funny!

‘Untermensch’, defined in ‘30’s Germany as ‘inferior people’ or ‘the masses from the East’, i.e. the Jews, the Slavs, the Roma. A term further applied to those of mixed race, those who were black and those who were mentally and/or physically disabled. Basically all those who those in power in Germany at the time we have been speaking of regarded as sub human.

Ring any bells compared with the rhetoric of today? It’s what the newly reinstated Mr. Lineker was talking about and in answer to your particularly daft question...of course, ‘calling for proper border controls’ has nothing to do with it. They are quite separate.

I’m sorry if you feel the need to add it to you list of forbidden words when describing current government attitudes. Incidentally...you might like to look up the meaning of ‘surpassed’.

No it doesn't eing any bells.
Show me your evidence where ANYONE has described the migrants as UNTERMENSCH, in German or its English equivalent.
Considering the term was derived in Germany who wanted every non Aryan out. To suggest it in the UK WHERE 18% of the population is ethnic, makes you look like a rabid dog.

Mr Lineker is supposed to be back on the pretext he shuts his mouth and abides by BBC rules, whilst a review is carried out on BBC guidelines. He was not aquitted and many full time workers within the BBC are not happy, he has not been sacked. So stop portraying him as a hero.
You fit the bill perfectly with your wording of the left, using Nazi's as a defence in an argument, in an effort to subdue the opposition.
We see it on every protest line in the country, where Nazi is thrown at anyone not agreeing with them. Pathetic.

Congratulations, you've joined the worlds current Psycho level in Putin/
He uses Nazi's as his excuse for butchering Ukranians

[ramAnag]

No it doesn't eing any bells.

Okay, there’s none so blind...as the saying goes.

The rest is just such unadulterated tripe that I’m not wasting my time replying to it...or quoting it.