Supporting Violence

[Ihavenojob]

 

[JP_]

Officially 10,000. Do you really believe the official figures. So how many do we let in? We're in deep trouble and borrowing for our grandchildren to repay.

Yes, lets think about the big crisis of the 20th Century. When we were in danger of being oppressed by Nazis our forefathers stood up and sorted it. These economic migrants should try sorting out their own problems in their own countries. Rather than running away to leach off taxpayers in other countries and cause untold social problems. Maybe they should sort their mess out rather than coming here for the easy life. Just as well our forefathers weren't weak cowards who shirked their responsibility and expected others to fund their lives. But then there weren't gullible bleeding hearts everywhere in those days like now willing to be generous with other people's money and create an unstable and unsafe situation in Europe.

Only those officially entering can be counted, can seek asylum, and be granted it. If they're not counted, they don't cost tax payers anything.

 

[Mottie]

Only those officially entering can be counted, can seek asylum, and be granted it. If they're not counted, they don't cost tax payers anything.

Really? How do they earn a living, clothe themselves, feed themselves, house themselves? Unless they came with an external income the only way I can see that they can support themselves are either working in the black economy or they are stealing to pay for those things, both of which costs us, the taxpayer.

 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

Of course u support violence most people do
Unless u are armish? I assume u are not?

Dunno about posts and I don't go back to any of em as I have zero interest
But most people will. Support violence depending on circumstances etc

So your allegation that I support violence is based on another of your assumptions, that most people support violence.
If you base your allegations on assumptions built on other assumptions, your allegations will invariably be false allegations.
Moreover it will demonstrate that your allegations are spread around without evidence, thought or consideration.
It's called bigotry or prejudice.

 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

Seems to be quite stupid to be welcoming all comers on a small and overcrowded island with severely stretched resources. Big business is the winner while ordinary people struggle.

ReganAndCarter has gone from overt racist to excusing his racism by being concerned about immigration.
I'm able to present evidence to support my allegation that ReganAndCarter is an overt racist, if anyone needs it.

 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

Some fella drowns in France and some how it's the Uks fault

How do you arrive at that conclusion?

 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

A question for those who welcome this inward migration - what would you change to help? would you issue free ferry tickets in northern france to help them on their way, or would you go further and commandeer the currently redundant cruise ships and have them bring back all who wish to come from all the poorer areas of the world (save them the tedious journey) And finally and most importantly what would you limit the numbers too?

Typical resort to absurd scenarios.
Let us be clear, no-one who is prepared to give shelter to refugees, wants, or is actively promoting your absurd suggestion.
There is a difference between helping refugees in need, and welcoming inward migration. So your very first sentence in your post is nonsense.

It's a complex problem, and presentation of absurd ideas do not help in the slightest.

On several occasions others have said that the problem is exacerbated by sale of arms.
It was also partly created by western governments short-sighted interference in foreign countries.

 

[dontbelieveawordofit]

Typical resort to absurd scenarios.
Let us be clear, no-one who is prepared to give shelter to refugees, wants, or is actively promoting your absurd suggestion.
There is a difference between helping refugees in need, and welcoming inward migration. So your very first sentence in your post is nonsense.

It's a complex problem, and presentation of absurd ideas do not help in the slightest.

On several occasions others have said that the problem is exacerbated by sale of arms.
It was also partly created by western governments short-sighted interference in foreign countries.

methinks he protests too much.
some people just keep digging.

 

[Munroast]

Typical resort to absurd scenarios.
Let us be clear, no-one who is prepared to give shelter to refugees, wants, or is actively promoting your absurd suggestion.
There is a difference between helping refugees in need, and welcoming inward migration. So your very first sentence in your post is nonsense.

It's a complex problem, and presentation of absurd ideas do not help in the slightest.

On several occasions others have said that the problem is exacerbated by sale of arms.
It was also partly created by western governments short-sighted interference in foreign countries.

so how would you deal with those who have already fled their countries of origin and are now on route, not just those on the other side of the channel but those about to cross the med. Do you let them make these perilous journeys or would you propose to help them on route, and if so how?

And would you limit numbers and if so how ?

 

[JP_]

either working in the black economy or they are stealing

Many people live in a society where it is normal for family to help each other. But the point remains, until the are granted asylum they don't cost you, a tax payer, anything significant. You'd be better off scrutinising what the government, both national and local, is wasting tax payer money on (clue: giving contracts to friends and family's businesses), and what tax breaks corporations are given to bolster share prices.

This really is a case of the tabloids making British people concerned about something that does not affect people. It's all made up by the press, and people like Farage.

 

[JP_]

or would you propose to help them on route, and if so how?

People were doing that years ago, then we pulled the plug on it, didn't we?

 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

so how would you deal with those who have already fled their countries of origin and are now on route, not just those on the other side of the channel but those about to cross the med. Do you let them make these perilous journeys or would you propose to help them on route, and if so how?

And would you limit numbers and if so how ?

There's already been several large discussions about the problem, I mean large as in UN, EU, etc.
But UK decided not to take its fair share of refugees. They have reduced their Foreign Aid. They are posturing to exit other organisation, and agreements designed for human rights protection.

In the short term, nations should be prepared to take their fair share of migrants.
In the short term, measures should be put in place close to the origin of refugees, but in safe places. During the Vietnam/Cambodia exodus, nations went to the camps in Thailand to take their fair share of refugees. They did not wait until the refugees were knocking on their doors. Those nations paid for and arranged transportation for the refugees, They arranged accommodation on their arrival, etc. Current family ties and the ages of the refugees were taken into consideration. Integration into society was arranged.
In the short term, the end of wars, violence, famines, etc should be sought urgently.

In the longer term, the causes of such wars, violence and famines (and the assistance of continuing those wars, via the sale of arms), should be sought and rectified.

On the issue of numbers, limit the reasons for refugees and you will limit the numbers created. But that takes a joined up approach, and when countries like UK, USA, refuse to participate in such a joint effort, and exploit the refugee crisis to deflect the blame of successive governments, it is counter-productive and divisive.

 

[transam]

How do you arrive at that conclusion?

General opinion expressed on the radio by dip sticks

Tis the French's fault

 

[transam]

So your allegation that I support violence is based on another of your assumptions, that most people support violence.
If you base your allegations on assumptions built on other assumptions, your allegations will invariably be false allegations.
Moreover it will demonstrate that your allegations are spread around without evidence, thought or consideration.
It's called bigotry or prejudice.

long winded ball cocks

Checking all your posts under all yer user names

So u don't support violence under any circumstances

Yeah right

 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

General opinion expressed on the radio by dip sticks

So you formed your opinion based on some 'dip sticks' on the radio?
I thought Farage was sacked from LBC some time ago.