Fortress Europe?

gogmilwr

Clanker
Well, if we can encourage pointless and clueless wastes of oxygen like you to off yourself, we would automatically improve the nations standards.
Wow, you've stumped me there, how can I come back from that rebuke and show that I am worthy of you or in fact the same air that you breathe!? Especially considering your wondrous additions to the discussion. Well gee, I guess I can't nor should I even bother. I'm guessing you're just super happy that you've won on merit :).
 
The student union/it all sounds great on paper left wing shite thats been spouted on here since yesterday boggles the mind. Britains well on its way to having over 70 million people easily within my lifetime according to most studies. At the moment theres roughly 61 million and house prices are already beyond the reach of the bulk of my generation (unless they mortgage themselves to the hilt, but thats will then lead to the same subprime bubble we've just had) and only set to rise as suitable sites for building (ie not destroying the greenbelt) decline. As other posters have said the national infrastructures already straining so just how well is it going to bare up under an additional 9 million? Theres two million unemployed as is, with the Times at least claiming there'll be another couple of hundred thousand by the years end and these figures won't even feature the thousands of illegals here already who can't get work. So whose to feed and cloth this rainbow family Gogmlwir and co are proposing by opening the flood gates? And before I get the standard leftist catcalls of racist and bigot take a look at my post history and you can easily find my track record of disgust for racists and the activites of the EDL and their kind. But whilst I think the government should have the balls to openly and constantly confront and challenge groups such as the EDL and BNP (as well as the UAF but thats for another thread) they should also have the brains to understand the genuine fear and anger these groups supporters have and indeed address them, not simply pretend they're all hate fuelled thugs and carry on as normal. As a human being I've no desire to see innocent people be murdered or starve to death but when push comes to shove its my friends and family over a Karen tribesman in Burma or a Pro-democracy protester in Iran and until we developed fusion energyand ultra HYV crops we will all, always have to pick and choose in the real world.
 
Wow, you've stumped me there, how can I come back from that rebuke and show that I am worthy of you or in fact the same air that you breathe!? .
You can't.

Especially considering your wondrous additions to the discussion. .
Praising me will not raise my low opinion of you.

Well gee, I guess I can't nor should I even bother.
Correct.

I'm guessing you're just super happy that you've won on merit .
Beating sub student level intellects over the head passes the time.
 

Badgertastic

Old-Salt
The creation of an immigration standard that allows for people to freely arrive and stay legally so they can be accommodated and checked, so that they don't have to turn to criminality
By making the illegal thing legal - genius.

Problem: Crime rates are too high, populace unhappy.

Solution: Legalise all criminal activity - no crime, therefore happy populace. Right?
 

gogmilwr

Clanker
What I actually said was to remove the barriers for people that want to enter LEGALLY that cannot so are FORCED to go illegally. If an aim of immigration control is to act as a check for people that enter and work in the country they are missing a HUGE amount of people that we do not know exist in the country as they operate outside of the law as they are fearful of being removed/imprisoned etc. etc. If these people are happy in the knowledge that they can enter legally-but not necessary stay for ever-then they can be checked and tracked and dealt with instead of being in the hands of criminality where they are taken advantage of for criminal means.

I'm not advocating removing laws or legalising criminal activity or allowing criminals in, what I am advocating is a renewal of the system so that people do not go to criminals to enter by removing the opportunity for criminals to act and thus making more distinct the difference between lifetime, career criminals and those that seek to move for legitimate reasons. If we can clearly identify the criminal element that is targeting people that otherwise would want to move lawfully they can be removed out of the equation and focus can be realigned back to the root cause of why the people wanted to move in the first place.

If they are are dead set of getting into the country it is better to have them do it legally where they can be identified, tracked and processed and take part in the economy for a reasonable length of time rather than have them come in under the wire, in the back of trucks being paid cash in hand (if at all), paying no tax, NI contributions and taking away income from legitimate companies as they are providing free/forced labour for the black and grey markets to operate against the legitimate ones.
 
What I actually said was to remove the barriers for people that want to enter LEGALLY that cannot so are FORCED to go illegally. .
No one is forcing ANYONE to enter the UK illegally!

If someone troops across asia and Europe to rock up on UK's shores, it's absolutely NOT because they are fleeing persecution or a better life. They can find that 'better life' in a dozen or more countries they came through on the way here.

When they were interviewing the assorted would be immigrants outside Calais last year, the TV talking head asked them:

'Why do you want to come to Britain, why not make a home in France?'

'Because in Britain they give us everything, house, car, money'.

The UK's full, we don't need any new immigrants, we already have nearly 10 million 'economically inactive' spongers of our own as it is.
 
gogmilwr

I applaud your charitable views. I am a believer that if one is not a recipient of chnarity, one should donate or work for such.

I am also of the view that to donate to charity or otherwise help other people, one has to maintain one's own position to do just that.



We are living beyond our means, and show no sign of that improving over the next 20 years.

In my view we need to take draconian steps to maintain our own position to be able to help others.

We need to look to cease giving anybody anything for nothing.

We need to protect that ethos which is truly British (not the mindless ECO twitterings, but the ethos of a nation which, with time and negotiation, can assimilate differing cultures), AND WHICH CAN AFFORD TO MAKE CONTRIBUTION TO POORER NATIONS IN THE FORM OF HELPING THEM TO HELP THEMSELVES.

We cannot, just CANNOT, survive further financial load from immigrants not able to support themselves.

The whole policing and Legal Aid system, for just one example, has had to have its funding rearranged so that long term citizens of the UK no longer receive a free service but in many areas are now assessed on income, and left without a real option for help, or whould I land with accusations against me, use my own hard earned cash to have myself defended.

Why? Because the budgets are eaten away with tens, probably hundreds of thousands of non english speaking nationals accused of crimes, interviews at police stations with long delays and great cost of providing interpreters, the high costs of carrying this process through the courts, and for many carried through to imprisoning people - who came, they say, for freedom, and end up supported in our prisons, whilst we pick up ths bills to feed and house their families. This is without counting the cost of the many many thousands of non productive jobs simply supporting these peoples "rights".


WE CANNOT AFFORD IT!

WHAT ABOUT MY RIGHTS TO LIVE PEACEFULLY, IN A SOCIETY WHERE I HAVE WORKED FOR MANY YEARS TO FIND, SHOULD I END UP WITH HARD TIMES, AND NEED TO OBTAIN FROM THE STATE SOME OF THE SERVICES TO WHICH I HAVE CONTRIBUTED TO FOR DECADES, TO FIND THAT MY MONEY HAS GONE ELSEWHERE?

Realism has to kick in before very long.

I am 62, this nation in reasonably civilised form will see me out.

But what legacy are we leaving to our children and to their children?
 

Badgertastic

Old-Salt
What I actually said was to remove the barriers for people that want to enter LEGALLY that cannot so are FORCED to go illegally.... <snip>
So, if they can't get in legally because they don't meet the requirements, we should remove all the requirements so that they can get in legally, and that's fine. Obviously, there was no genuine reason that the nasty immigration service wanted to decline their entry in the first place, no legal/illegal* immigrants ever tell lies to get in, and have obviously not travelled through umpteen safe countries to get here in the first place.

*delete depending on how you've decided to modifiy the immigration system this week

I'm not advocating removing laws or legalising criminal activity or allowing criminals in <snip>
Despite the fact that removing barriers to entry for all and sundry would have precisely that effect...

Edited to add: what sonoficarus said - nobody is forcing people to come here illegally. If they are genuinely in fear for their lives, they can stop in the first safe place (which I believe is what the UN states should be the case, though I'm willing to be corrected if I'm wrong), not the first place that they come to which will give them a free house in Kensington...
 

Devon_Walker

Old-Salt
Old News, sure, but in the News today: BBC News - UK Border Agency &#039;failing over visa controls&#039; and doesn't really inspire confidence, now does it?

"Immigration staff are failing to take action against hundreds of migrant workers who have no right to stay in Britain, a critical report has found. John Vine, an independent chief inspector of the UK Border Agency, said the visas of migrants whose jobs had ended were not being cancelled. He also found insufficient checks were being carried out on companies which sponsor overseas workers. Immigration minister Damian Green said the system was being improved".

"Many staff perceived that quality of decision-making and controlling immigration were not as much of a priority for the UK Border Agency as generating income and providing customer service."
 
No one is forcing ANYONE to enter the UK illegally!

If someone troops across asia and Europe to rock up on UK's shores, it's absolutely NOT because they are fleeing persecution or a better life. They can find that 'better life' in a dozen or more countries they came through on the way here.

When they were interviewing the assorted would be immigrants outside Calais last year, the TV talking head asked them:

'Why do you want to come to Britain, why not make a home in France?'

'Because in Britain they give us everything, house, car, money'.

The UK's full, we don't need any new immigrants, we already have nearly 10 million 'economically inactive' spongers of our own as it is.
Nail - hammer interface. People who travel hundreds of miles to France, then wait for weeks or months until they get a chance to cross the Channel into England are NOT asylum seekers. If they were, they would stop in the first civilised country they rocked up in after escaping. And in spite of ARRSE'r's views on France, it still fits that description.

Time to pull up the drawbridge, start boiling the oil and order the crossbowmen to Stand To. There is no more room.

Might be time for a new Europe wide agency, preferably along the lines of the old KGB Border Guards...
 
Old News, sure, but in the News today: BBC News - UK Border Agency &#039;failing over visa controls&#039; and doesn't really inspire confidence, now does it?

"Immigration staff are failing to take action against hundreds of migrant workers who have no right to stay in Britain, a critical report has found. John Vine, an independent chief inspector of the UK Border Agency, said the visas of migrants whose jobs had ended were not being cancelled. He also found insufficient checks were being carried out on companies which sponsor overseas workers. Immigration minister Damian Green said the system was being improved".

"Many staff perceived that quality of decision-making and controlling immigration were not as much of a priority for the UK Border Agency as generating income and providing customer service."
What happend tot he new Border Police the Tories promised? Or has that gone the way of everything else with the exception of International Aid and the fcuking Olympics?
 
What I actually said was to remove the barriers for people that want to enter LEGALLY that cannot so are FORCED to go illegally. If an aim of immigration control is to act as a check for people that enter and work in the country they are missing a HUGE amount of people that we do not know exist in the country as they operate outside of the law as they are fearful of being removed/imprisoned etc. etc. If these people are happy in the knowledge that they can enter legally-but not necessary stay for ever-then they can be checked and tracked and dealt with instead of being in the hands of criminality where they are taken advantage of for criminal means.

I'm not advocating removing laws or legalising criminal activity or allowing criminals in, what I am advocating is a renewal of the system so that people do not go to criminals to enter by removing the opportunity for criminals to act and thus making more distinct the difference between lifetime, career criminals and those that seek to move for legitimate reasons. If we can clearly identify the criminal element that is targeting people that otherwise would want to move lawfully they can be removed out of the equation and focus can be realigned back to the root cause of why the people wanted to move in the first place.

If they are are dead set of getting into the country it is better to have them do it legally where they can be identified, tracked and processed and take part in the economy for a reasonable length of time rather than have them come in under the wire, in the back of trucks being paid cash in hand (if at all), paying no tax, NI contributions and taking away income from legitimate companies as they are providing free/forced labour for the black and grey markets to operate against the legitimate ones.
What you seem to be missing is that unless you allow anybody and everybody free unrestricted access then you will, by default, have some who are not allowed in so there will still be illegal immigration.

All you are doing is moving the goalposts for who can/can't enter. Or are you seriously advocating doing away will all checks?
 

gogmilwr

Clanker
All you are doing is moving the goalposts for who can/can't enter. Or are you seriously advocating doing away will all checks?
No, I'm saying let's do something to allow the checks to be carried out on all immigrants rather than those that happen to be caught out when they go through the current official method so that they can all be identified, checked and processed and then dealt with as opposed to spending loads more time and money running around the country investigating where they may or may not be how they may or may not have got in or what they may or may not be doing and then spending more time and money being unsuccessful getting people that failed to gain asylum status or no longer need to be refugees away from the country. I want an immigration service/border control that is able to do just that and not have to play catch up all the time.
 
Gogmilwr why are you not answering the point that several posters have brought up now, that all of these refugees have illegally crossed through at least two countries where they could have legitimately claimed asylum if they were genuine, to get to Britain. They have no right to be here unless the UK is the first safe country they can reach, which bar economic refugees from Ireland and Iceland is pretty much no-one. Spain, Italy, Malta, Greece etc have caught that geographic bullet and while I'm willing to chip into the EU pot to help them out thats as far as I and I suspect the bulk of the British population are willing to go.
 

gogmilwr

Clanker
Gogmilwr why are you not answering the point that several posters have brought up now, that all of these refugees have illegally crossed through at least two countries where they could have legitimately claimed asylum if they were genuine, to get to Britain.
No one had posed any direct question to me regarding that, at least none that I've read.

I don't necessarily agree with the stated concept which, I believe that I am free to do so. That isn't to say that I am "detached from reality" it is to say that I have my own beliefs, freedom of thought and philosophical perspective. Nor am I saying you, or anyone else must agree with me. All I've done so far is write what I may think about various things. I am arguing from the standing point that there are many, many people who are disallowed asylum status in one country or another which, does not necessarily mean that they are not in need of asylum. If they cannot go back home then they must move on and if they are denied a legal way to do so then what is left?

If there were a civil war in the UK next week and I was being persecuted here I may be off to Ireland or France and if they say "No" or "Non!" then what am I meant to do if I can't come back here for fear of being incarcerated due to my name, gender, nationality, political perspective or racial background or whatever other excuse someone has for wanting to kill me and my family? I'd have to move on.
 
No, I'm saying let's do something to allow the checks to be carried out on all immigrants.

'UK passport or foreign one with entry visa?'

'No, I want to come to eengland'

'F**K off mate, we're full - NEXT!'

See, it's that simple.
 
I am arguing from the standing point that there are many, many people who are disallowed asylum status in one country or another which, does not necessarily mean that they are not in need of asylum. If they cannot go back home then they must move on and if they are denied a legal way to do so then what is left?
99.99% of the people who rock up here are not asylum seekers so stop spouting that balls.



If there were a civil war in the UK next week and I was being persecuted here I may be off to Ireland or France and if they say "No" or "Non!" then what am I meant to do if I can't come back here for fear of being incarcerated due to my name, gender, nationality, political perspective or racial background or whatever other excuse someone has for wanting to kill me and my family? I'd have to move on.
How about manning the **** up, taking up arms and fighting for your rights in your country?


You argue your position like a rather simple schoolchild with a totally naive worldview based on zero first hand experience of the world other than a trip to Alton Towers.
 

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top