Dianne Abbott

[Vic]

It is increasingly difficult to take anything you say seriously Vic when this is a response from you to a very matter of fact post.

So the "matter of fact" is the hope of keeping out refugees and of "governments having to listen to the wishes of the population they represent".

Keeping out Jewish refugees seems to have been popular in 1938 and keeping out Jewish economic migrants in the early years of the last century resulted in the first restriction on entry of aliens to Britain, and that seems to have been based on popular sentiment.

I'm happy to be reassured that anti-immigrant people now would have been pro-immigrant then.

 

[Ban-jani]

So the "matter of fact" is the hope of keeping out refugees and of "governments having to listen to the wishes of the population they represent".

Keeping out Jewish refugees seems to have been popular in 1938 and keeping out Jewish economic migrants in the early years of the last century resulted in the first restriction on entry of aliens to Britain, and that seems to have been based on popular sentiment.

I'm happy to be reassured that anti-immigrant people now would have been pro-immigrant then.

Vic, Vic, Vic, why must everything you say be so ridiculous?

No one is calling for refugees to be kept out, what we are saying is that there needs to be more done within the EU and specifically France, in stopping them trying to illegally enter Britain, when they’re already in a safe country, via a dinghy, that puts lives at risk.

Blueinsa wants Britain and France to agree for a centre at the border on the French side, for people to seek asylum. I don’t want that, I want the UN to centralise something and for members to take genuine refugees equally, to ensure they’re housed and safe and that nations are taking responsibility.

What we don’t want is people trying to cross the Channel in boats, organised by criminal gangs, to sneak into the country and likely end up in crime or slavery or work below minimum wage with no security.

Patel trying to stop it being a possibility is a deterrent to future people trying it. Having the Navy there to intercept people will likely also save lives.

Or we could keep encouraging it and continue to fish bodies out?

 

[blueinsa]

So the "matter of fact" is the hope of keeping out refugees and of "governments having to listen to the wishes of the population they represent".

Keeping out Jewish refugees seems to have been popular in 1938 and keeping out Jewish economic migrants in the early years of the last century resulted in the first restriction on entry of aliens to Britain, and that seems to have been based on popular sentiment.

I'm happy to be reassured that anti-immigrant people now would have been pro-immigrant then.

No the matter of fact is a majority of the electorate voting for and getting a government that listens to it Vic. A majority of our electorate will never vote for open borders and never vote for unlimited immigration.

That is a matter of fact, your Daily Mail Hitler/Jews post was just a bit silly but fear not, I know why you posted it.

 

[BobKowalski]

Vic, Vic, Vic, why must everything you say be so ridiculous?

No one is calling for refugees to be kept out, what we are saying is that there needs to be more done within the EU and specifically France, in stopping them trying to illegally enter Britain, when they’re already in a safe country, via a dinghy, that puts lives at risk.

Blueinsa wants Britain and France to agree for a centre at the border on the French side, for people to seek asylum. I don’t want that, I want the UN to centralise something and for members to take genuine refugees equally, to ensure they’re housed and safe and that nations are taking responsibility.

What we don’t want is people trying to cross the Channel in boats, organised by criminal gangs, to sneak into the country and likely end up in crime or slavery or work below minimum wage with no security.

Patel trying to stop it being a possibility is a deterrent to future people trying it. Having the Navy there to intercept people will likely also save lives.

Or we could keep encouraging it and continue to fish bodies out?

We do keep encouraging it.We close down avenues to enter safely, which means people try desperate measures. The solution is then to make it easier for people to join family and/or communities here.

A joint operation with France in housing and processing applicants to allow them to travel and settle here safely would reduce the need for people trying to travel here in dinghies.

That way we could ‘do our fair share’. Getting warships to intercept them is pointless virtue signalling on steroids.

 

[Ban-jani]

We do keep encouraging it.We close down avenues to enter safely, which means people try desperate measures. The solution is then to make it easier for people to join family and/or communities here.

A joint operation with France in housing and processing applicants to allow them to travel and settle here safely would reduce the need for people trying to travel here in dinghies.

That way we could ‘do our fair share’. Getting warships to intercept them is pointless virtue signalling on steroids.

Why aren’t they seeking asylum in France? Or Spain or Italy or other EU nations they pass through? Why are they on our border?

Have you thought that maybe they are coming specifically here for economic reasons?

That’s why I want it coordinated by the UN fairly, which will never happen because they are useless.

A robust system to determine whether they are fleeing genuine danger and then a fair system of taking these people, across the UN is needed.

It’s not bloody war ships is it, you make it sound like HMS Elizabeth is swanning around the Channel hoovering them up.

They’ve deployed the Navy because they are best placed to do it.

You’re in favour of uncontrolled immigration, so we are never going to agree on this, thankfully your views are a tiny minority.

 

[BobKowalski]

Why aren’t they seeking asylum in France? Or Spain or Italy or other EU nations they pass through? Why are they on our border?

Have you thought that maybe they are coming specifically here for economic reasons?

That’s why I want it coordinated by the UN fairly, which will never happen because they are useless.

A robust system to determine whether they are fleeing genuine danger and then a fair system of taking these people, across the UN is needed.

It’s not bloody war ships is it, you make it sound like HMS Elizabeth is swanning around the Channel hoovering them up.

They’ve deployed the Navy because they are best placed to do it.

You’re in favour of uncontrolled immigration, so we are never going to agree on this, thankfully your views are a tiny minority.

They want to come here because of existing family ties, friends, communities etc. They are looking for a support network, which when you are in a strange country helps. Language is also a factor, if you speak the language of the country you want to reside in, it will help you settle.

More refugees settle in the first country they arrive in. Which is why there are millions in the Med countries, Turkey etc. More settle in Germany, France than they do here.

This still leaves a proportion who wish to settle here, so establish a joint operation in France to handle these application, make it a ‘friendly environment’ by allowing those with family or other ties here safe passage and you will start reducing the number of crossings in dinghies.

The navy in whatever ship they send has zero chance of spotting three men in a boat. It’s virtue signalling in place of doing something practical.

 

[blueinsa]

The navy in whatever ship they send has zero chance of spotting three men in a boat. It’s virtue signalling in place of doing something practical.

No its not like they have cutting edge military grade radar or anything that can spot a threat from over 300 miles away so what chance of them picking up a boat?

Fuck me!

 

[Ban-jani]

They want to come here because of existing family ties, friends, communities etc. They are looking for a support network, which when you are in a strange country helps. Language is also a factor, if you speak the language of the country you want to reside in, it will help you settle.

More refugees settle in the first country they arrive in. Which is why there are millions in the Med countries, Turkey etc. More settle in Germany, France than they do here.

This still leaves a proportion who wish to settle here, so establish a joint operation in France to handle these application, make it a ‘friendly environment’ by allowing those with family or other ties here safe passage and you will start reducing the number of crossings in dinghies.

The navy in whatever ship they send has zero chance of spotting three men in a boat. It’s virtue signalling in place of doing something practical.

Fair points regarding the first few things you’ve said and that definitely is a factor, I do feel economics is a huge thing with many of their network or family choosing the UK too but I don’t begrudge them trying to get here, the UK is a great place to live.

This doesn’t mean we should be taking them if they aren’t in any danger, that is the key point here.

There does need to be cooperation at international level and I want the UK to play it’s part in helping genuine refugees, I just think it needs to be bigger than the UK and France.

The last bit I totally disagree with, the Navy will easily be able to pick them up, it’s the equivalent of a police officer stopping a 90 year old wheel bound shop lifter.

Of course they can locate dinghies in the Channel.

 

[BobKowalski]

No its not like they have cutting edge military grade radar or anything that can spot a threat from over 300 miles away so what chance of them picking up a boat?

Fuck me!

I am heartened by your confidence in the navy’s ability to pinpoint a small slow moving rubber dinghy in the middle of the channel in some of the worlds busiest shipping lanes.

But then giving people ‘confidence’ is pretty much the sole ambition of the ‘send in the navy to sort it out’ message.

If however I am wrong and the navy can sweep them up with ease and bring them safely to the UK to be processed then I can live with that.

 

[blueinsa]

I am heartened by your confidence in the navy’s ability to pinpoint a small slow moving rubber dinghy in the middle of the channel in some of the worlds busiest shipping lanes.

But then giving people ‘confidence’ is pretty much the sole ambition of the ‘send in the navy to sort it out’ message.

If however I am wrong and the navy can sweep them up with ease and bring them safely to the UK to be processed then I can live with that.

Have some confidence Bob.

The days of a lookout on the crows nest with a spyglass are long gone and even Tory austerity hasn't sent us back to those days.