Channel migrants face lifetime ban on returning to UK

[gant]

The French already process them, they tell them what time their boats coming in.

 

[Justin Passing]

Else isn't the point. Why would it be our problem?

\I don't know what you're struggling with.
If you have a speed limit, you have to have a procedure if someone breaks it.
If you have a "Limit" on immigration, ditto.

So - I'll explain in short words -
If you have an agreed mechanism and limit for all countries in, say, Europe, which sounds like a fair system according to many,

what do you do with the people who turn up outside those arrangements?

---

One outcome is likely to be ID cards.

 

[ellal]

One outcome is likely to be ID cards.

And more control over the UK population...

It will do nothing to solve the immigration issue!

 

[noseall]

So - I'll explain in short words -
If you have an agreed mechanism and limit for all countries in, say, Europe, which sounds like a fair system according to many,

'mechanism' is four syllables. However 'language' is fewer syllables, almost as long but just as easy to comprehend.

 

[Deleted member 18243]

If you have an agreed mechanism and limit for all countries in, say, Europe, which sounds like a fair system according to many,

what do you do with the people who turn up outside those arrangements?

---

I'm asking why should we deal with these people, not how?

Also, in Britain there is no limit on anything that is funded by the taxpayer and given away by the Government, so talk of limits to immigration are academic.

 

[Deleted member 294929]

Everyone agrees that the sensible thing to do is have processing facilities in France, but the rabid wing of the Tories can't stand the idea of asylum seekers so the government refuses to do it.

Agree

Ive always said this. I'm thinking why would the government not do this.... maybe because the french would not entertain the idea!

 

[IT Minion]

Agree

Ive always said this. I'm thinking why would the government not do this.... maybe because the french would not entertain the idea!

They're fine with it. It's literally just that it will mean more Asylum claims being filed and accepted.

 

[Deleted member 294929]

They're fine with it. It's literally just that it will mean more Asylum claims being filed and accepted.

Why would they have to be accepted. Surely it would be on a case by case reach the criteria test

 

[JonathanM]

I haven’t made any comment about the rights and wrongs of what Gary Lineker said in any of the threads, because I didn’t know enough. Also, I’ve been trying to get my little brain up to speed with things like Godwin’s Law and whether comparisons with the Nazis are ever legitimate.

Anyway, this is what Deborah Lipstadt, the famous Holocaust historian, who is herself a Jew, had to say about whether it is ever appropriate to make comparisons with the 1930s, and specifically when it came to Donald Trump. Her answer is nuanced and she seems to be saying it depends when in the 1930s you are talking about. She made these comments during the 2020 Presidential election campaign, but before Trump had started denying the election result and his supporters invaded Congress, intent on killing law makers.

“I would say in the attacks we’re seeing on the press, the courts, academic institutions, elected officials and even, and most chillingly, the electoral process, that this deserves comparison,”

But in the current era, Lipstadt said, the key to acceptable Holocaust comparisons is precision and nuance. Is it the Holocaust? No. But does the current era presage an authoritarian takeover? Maybe.

“People ask me, is this Kristallnacht?” she said. “Is this the beginning of pogroms, etc.? I don’t think those comparisons are correct. However, I do think certain comparisons are fitting … it’s certainly not 1938,” when Nazis led the Kristallnacht pogroms throughout Germany. “It’s not even September 1935, and the Nuremberg Laws” institutionalizing racist policies.

“What it well might be is December 1932, Hitler comes to power on Jan. 30, 1933 — it might be Jan. 15, 1933.”

I agree with her that it is all a matter of degree and that people shouldn’t be able to automatically shut down debate anytime somebody makes any sort of comparison to the Nazis. Even Mr Godwin has said that that such comparisons are sometimes appropriate. Fascists will not always be intent on genocide but we still have to be able to discuss history and learn from it. I understand that Jews are fiercely protective of anything that dilutes the legacy of the Holocaust. But the 1930s also provide the most famous and recognisable template for how fascists come to power.

 

[IT Minion]

Why would they have to be accepted. Surely it would be on a case by case reach the criteria test

And most do pass that test. The difficulty is in getting to somewhere you can do the paperwork.

 

[Deleted member 294929]

And most do pass that test. The difficulty is in getting to somewhere you can do the paperwork.

Then I agree but would you then agree the boat people get deported straight away.


And it would be women children & families first

 

[IT Minion]

Then I agree but would you then agree the boat people get deported straight away.


And it would be women children & families first

No, I don't agree. Because what would actually happen is that there would be a five year queue to see the single immigration officer. In theory it would make sense but trusting the Home Office is a silly thing to do.

It would reduce the number of people coming by boat dramatically though, and save money. But at a cost of accepting more people who need help.

 

[Deleted member 294929]

No, I don't agree. Because what would actually happen is that there would be a five year queue to see the single immigration officer. In theory it would make sense but trusting the Home Office is a silly thing to do.

It would reduce the number of people coming by boat dramatically though, and save money. But at a cost of accepting more people who need help.

Can you explain to me where are all the women and children and why in general there's only young paperless men.

 

[Justin Passing]

I'm asking why should we deal with these people, not how?

Yes, but that's because you' have more than usual difficulty in following a couple of sentences. So when you get an answer which is strange to you, you should stop and think.

The question of what to do with the extras was posed in the context of having set up a system with agreed limits.
Your dumb response was outside the terms of the question, therefore a different question and irrelevant to this one.

If you want you can ponder your own question yourself. Being outside of the agreed immigration/refugee system, extras would be illegal, so they could well die somewhere in the gutter, unless we sent them somewhere else, put them in prison, etc. OK?

 

[IT Minion]

Can you explain to me where are all the women and children and why in general there's only young paperless men.

No, can you explain why young men can't be refugees?