The UK/European migrant problem

For the avoidance of doubt, I don't think any on here believe that uncontrolled immigration, let alone uncontrolled illegal immigration, is a good thing. There are plenty of downsides in the security, crime, social cohesion areas, let alone demands on NHS and education resource. There are also the effects on their countries of origin. If the "doctors and engineers" keep leaving, those countries will remain relative basket cases or get even worse. All of which supports the ability to control who comes in and who stays.

The issue here is not wokery - which I detest as much as the next middle-aged white bloke - it is the letter and interpretation of the law and the willingness of of both lobby groups and the multitude of NGO/Quangos to use it against the state. Which inevitably results in at best institutional paralysis and at worst good people trying to do the right thing being at risk of litigation and criminal punishment. Again, for the avoidance of doubt - that's the people of the BF and the RNLI and the RN etc, NOT the littleboatbrain people.

To get control, we have to "control" the legal establishment - bearing in mind that is by definition an ethical and evolving argument - where the national interest rather than some supra-national principle must be considered. Once you get that sorted, all sorts of more robust repatriation measures can be considered, which when it becomes largely inevitable, will be the solution.
 
For the avoidance of doubt, I don't think any on here believe that uncontrolled immigration, let alone uncontrolled illegal immigration, is a good thing. There are plenty of downsides in the security, crime, social cohesion areas, let alone demands on NHS and education resource. There are also the effects on their countries of origin. If the "doctors and engineers" keep leaving, those countries will remain relative basket cases or get even worse. All of which supports the ability to control who comes in and who stays.

The issue here is not wokery - which I detest as much as the next middle-aged white bloke - it is the letter and interpretation of the law and the willingness of of both lobby groups and the multitude of NGO/Quangos to use it against the state. Which inevitably results in at best institutional paralysis and at worst good people trying to do the right thing being at risk of litigation and criminal punishment. Again, for the avoidance of doubt - that's the people of the BF and the RNLI and the RN etc, NOT the littleboatbrain people.

To get control, we have to "control" the legal establishment - bearing in mind that is by definition an ethical and evolving argument - where the national interest rather than some supra-national principle must be considered. Once you get that sorted, all sorts of more robust repatriation measures can be considered, which when it becomes largely inevitable, will be the solution.
I have to say that wishing to 'control the legal establishment ' is an ominous suggestion. Juroes, where used, decide on the vase presented to them. Judges apply the law as written; the Police (or other authority) prepare the case and submit them to CPS ;and still in the UK everyone is entitled to a fair trial.
 
For the avoidance of doubt, I don't think any on here believe that uncontrolled immigration, let alone uncontrolled illegal immigration, is a good thing. There are plenty of downsides in the security, crime, social cohesion areas, let alone demands on NHS and education resource. There are also the effects on their countries of origin. If the "doctors and engineers" keep leaving, those countries will remain relative basket cases or get even worse. All of which supports the ability to control who comes in and who stays.

The issue here is not wokery - which I detest as much as the next middle-aged white bloke - it is the letter and interpretation of the law and the willingness of of both lobby groups and the multitude of NGO/Quangos to use it against the state. Which inevitably results in at best institutional paralysis and at worst good people trying to do the right thing being at risk of litigation. Again, for the avoidance of doubt - that's the people of the BF and the RNLI and the RN etc, NOT the littleboatbrain people.

To get control, we have to "control" the legal establishment - bearing in mind that is by definition an ethical and evolving argument - where the national interest rather than some supra-national principle must be considered. Once you get that sorted, all sorts of more robust repatriation measures can be considered, which when it becomes largely inevitable, will be the solution.

I suggest that most who post, about the issue of mass illegal migration, be it in a black humour (trebuchet) or inflammatory nature (GPMG) would agree with what you have written. That said I understand why some are being driven to an anger that I suspect was not of their normal nature, before the last decade of the tail wagging the dog.

As you say "national interest rather than some supra-national principle must be considered", and clearly the national interest is to stop mass migration, and includes as you say "robust repatriation measures". With that I cannot agree more, sadly that requires both political will and backbone as to as you correctly say "control" the legal establishment.

Sadly the useful idiots, midwits, and political activists of the left screech loudly that to do anything to curtail mass migration is tantamount to 'crimes against humanity'. That such a stance is likely to cause a breakdown of the very society they are part of seems to pass them by.

There has never been an explicit ask of the voting public of if mass migration is what they want. The failure by UK Government and institutions of governance to keep account of actual numbers over the decades rather than the guesstimates that are have been used, has resulted in the infrastructure of the nation crumbling away and is now barely able to manage, be it health, housing education or Law and order, to mention just a few, and not just in urban areas.

The mass migration has also lead to a Government and institutions of state embracing the societal model of "multiculturalism" which clearly has failed rather it leads to 'ghettoisation' and the fracturing of cohesive society. The integration of migration seen in previous centuries is not what is happening today, is it little wonder that the politics of Identitarianism that focus on the demographics of replacement, rather than integration and that more citizens are embracing or starting to consider such a destructive ideology...

If mass migration across the board is not dealt with in the national interest rather than some supra-national ideal, then conflict be it politically or actual is likely. The useful idiots, midwits, and political activists of the left are and will be responsible for such.

edited for corrections and diction.
 
Last edited:

PhotEx

On ROPS
On ROPs
So using your logic a small Police patrol boat, can ignore the much trumpeted 'Solas'.

Nope, the Police boat will be told to stand off and escort the migrants towards the large BF cutter coming to conduct the rescue.
The Coastguard Operations Centre sees the bigger picture, the littleboatbrain people (TM NaB), not so much.

Its SAR 101
 
I have to say that wishing to 'control the legal establishment ' is an ominous suggestion. Juroes, where used, decide on the vase presented to them. Judges apply the law as written; the Police (or other authority) prepare the case and submit them to CPS ;and still in the UK everyone is entitled to a fair trial.
Sorry - perhaps I was not clear. Not all legal proceedings involve juries. Judicial review and similar are conducted exclusively by lawyers and judges, there's no jury involved. Those interpretations affect how the law is written - see the levels of judicial activism for examples - and how judges have to interpret it.

It's the antithesis of trying to control sentencing, which is a very different thing.
 
Nope, the Police boat will be told to stand off and escort the migrants towards the large BF cutter coming to conduct the rescue.
The Coastguard Operations Centre sees the bigger picture, the littleboatbrain people (TM NaB), not so much.

Its SAR 101

So we should consider Adding SAR to your list of expertise.

A professed expert on everything from the Royal Navy to the Paras: PhotEx is a bell-end full of shit.

THICK AS SHIT, SS OBSESSED CüNT​


edited spellinks
 
For the avoidance of doubt, I don't think any on here believe that uncontrolled immigration, let alone uncontrolled illegal immigration, is a good thing. There are plenty of downsides in the security, crime, social cohesion areas, let alone demands on NHS and education resource. There are also the effects on their countries of origin. If the "doctors and engineers" keep leaving, those countries will remain relative basket cases or get even worse. All of which supports the ability to control who comes in and who stays.

The issue here is not wokery - which I detest as much as the next middle-aged white bloke - it is the letter and interpretation of the law and the willingness of of both lobby groups and the multitude of NGO/Quangos to use it against the state. Which inevitably results in at best institutional paralysis and at worst good people trying to do the right thing being at risk of litigation and criminal punishment. Again, for the avoidance of doubt - that's the people of the BF and the RNLI and the RN etc, NOT the littleboatbrain people.

To get control, we have to "control" the legal establishment - bearing in mind that is by definition an ethical and evolving argument - where the national interest rather than some supra-national principle must be considered. Once you get that sorted, all sorts of more robust repatriation measures can be considered, which when it becomes largely inevitable, will be the solution.
I think much of what you posit could be applied to many areas of British society today.

And I agree wholeheartedly with everything you wrote.
 
So…

This claim that EVERY Migrant that comes to the UK does so to sign on for a life of benefits and non employment?

I may be missing something here, but doesn't peoples need an NI number to claim Benefits - and we would then know not only how many of them are arriving, but also where they are?
Please stop with the true facts, it destroys the fantasy world some people inhabit...
 

Gout Man

LE
Book Reviewer
Just look at the graph in this link.
I agree with NF, that’s Nigel Farage before any one starts.


A small quote from the link.

The prime minister's spokesman said the government was committed to tackling the issue of small boats crossing the channel

Jesus I would hate to think how many would come across if we weren’t tackling this problem.
 
So…

This claim that EVERY Migrant that comes to the UK does so to sign on for a life of benefits and non employment?

I may be missing something here, but doesn't peoples need an NI number to claim Benefits - and we would then know not only how many of them are arriving, but also where they are?
really hard
 

'Call in the military!': Ex-chief immigration officer says Border Force is 'operating a migrant collection service in the Channel' as dozens more arrive in UK today and furious Tories accuse Priti of being 'fobbed off by French excuses'​

Are you saying they should. be left to there own devices? the World Maritime Rule, anyone in distress at sea must be offered succour.
 

Latest Threads

Top