Reply With Quotechocolate for dinner???Originally Posted by squidge
calorietastic
1K.Orger
Yes Davth I will, when I have a minute to give you a proper response with references and accurate information. I am in the process of drafting a reply but it will take longer than the space I have whilst waiting for the chocolate to melt for dinner tonight - my lads are coming so I'm doing something nice. Ink all honesty it will be later today.
.Orger
chocolate for dinner???
calorietastic
1K.Orger
Well im a fat lady Davth, what would you expect me to eat? its chocolate mousse for dessert lol. My eldest lad is just back from weeks in Angola
1K.Orger
No, what you are actually doing is repeating yourself over and over again in the vain hope people like me who choose to take responsibility for my own children first, will change our minds and agree with you. You try your best to belittle and judge me because I put my children before anybody else. That's fine, but I will say this if I lived in such a war torn god awful place, my first priority would not be to bring more children into that environment.
I can't count the times you asked us what we were going to do, but when I ask you - "To tell you what I am doing would mean telling you who I am and I'm not particularly comfortable with doing that just now" Is that the best you can come up with ?
Not that this will bother you because these are British people that this is affecting - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-34095190
1K.Orger
Maybe you can point out exactly where I belittled you and judged you for putting your children first? The "we" I have referred to throughout this thread is the collective "we" of Britain, Scotland, or society. It's not you and me skipping off to Calais, with a sleeping bag to show solidarity.
And yes, that is the best I can do. If I set out my actions and what I am doing people will know who I am. I would rather not put up information which allows people to identify me and find my address without any control over that. If you want to send me a PM introducing yourself and telling me what you want to know I'll happily introduce myself right back and tell you what I'm busy being up to and explain why I am being so careful
Oh.... And PS - if we took action, proper robust action on an EU wide basis, putting proper systems in place, dealing with this crisis then those British Lorry drivers would be safer, under less pressure and far, far, far more secure. Oh, and that "we" is the British Government. Just in case you thought I was speaking about you......
Last edited by squidge; 30-Aug-15 at 14:13.
1K.Orger
Right Davth The law on refugees is governed by international treaties. The UN convention relating to the status of refugees from 1951 is the main one and there is the 1967 protocol and others but these don't set the law in every country. This treaty sets out clear rights that refugees have and the international obligations but each country is able to set its own laws. So in Britain, then it's the immigration act which sets out the limitations on those people coming into this country.
If we take Syria for example, in Britain and in other EU countries, Syrians need a visa. So without a visa they cannot enter Britain. That is the "legal route" - someone without a visa cannot get into Britain and would be turned away and so currently, the only way into Europe, Britain is inside a lorry, in the crawl space of an aeroplane, in a wee inflatable dinghy or other ways. People who leave their homes and their lives behind putting themselves and their children at risk is not done because they somehow care less about their children, or because they don't prioritise them in the same way as "we" do but because they are desperate, fear death is near anyway, and believe it is their only chance to get away from a dreadful situation.
I have mentioned Germany quite a bit on this thread. Germany is the only country in Europe which has suspended its visa requirements for Syrians which means that Syrians can enter Germany legally, it means that they have rights to stay in Germany and not be returned to Syria. Britain has not recognised Syrians as refugees in law. It suits many of the commentators to lump all these people together as "migrants" because it avoids the acknowledge that that they have these rights. Setting up safe routes for refugees is about suspending visa requirements and assessing people properly on arrival in the EU and sharing out the burden of supporting these desperate people.
The failure of Britain and the EU to act on this crisis makes everything worse for everyone. Cpt linked to the lorry driver so let's talk about him for a moment. If the EU set up proper reception areas for refugees, if all EU countries worked together to decide in a compassionate and humane way how to process these people then they would be allocated to various countries, supported properly when they arrived and would be less likely to end up desperate at places like Calais. If there were reuniting family programmes where someone turning up in a boat, had relatives or friends in Britain then they could be sent to Britain. Same with Germany or France. Britain currently has no such programmes for refugees. This means that people end up at Calais, desperate to get across the channel to be with people who are already here and cannot get here by legal means. So the poor lorry driver bears the brunt of the failure of Britain and the rest of the EU to address this crisis.
That's it really Davth. Addressing this crisis, preventing the deaths of hundreds of desperate people by acknowledging there IS a crisis is the best way to begin to resolve it. It is not about letting anyone walk into Britain or the EU, it's about meeting our international obligations under the treaties mentioned at the start, to protect and uphold the rights of refugees who are truly the world's most desperate people.
Last edited by squidge; 30-Aug-15 at 15:07.
Banned (Sock Puppet of previously banned user)
Lots of hyperbole about how " we " should do something still no answers over cause and effect.
I'd still like to know how Squidge intends to deal with the cause of these problems to stop the effect !
No doubt an overwhelming silence will ensue as there is no desire to actually get to grips with the harsh bitter realities of today's world just more wall papering over ever increasing cracks.
Let's for once hear how Squidge intends to deal with the problems throughout the Middle East, Afghanistan, Eritrea, Nigeria and a whole plethora of other nations who aren't particularly savoury.
Any idiot can dole out food, clothing, accommodation and money to immigrants but it doesn't deal with the root cause of the problem and in itself just creates a larger problem as anyone with an I.Q above 1 would be able to tell you.
Free anything will always have a queue !
Banned (Sock Puppet of previously banned user)
So in reality it's a situation the UN should be dealing with as they have done in many other countries it's part of their remit so why haven't the UN stepped in to take control of the situation in these countries.Nope instead the buck is passed on to individual countries and then advantage taken of the schengen area.If you are genuinely fleeing repression then any country will do not transitting right across Europe to enter the UK.This is where Squidges argument falls down and becomes more hysterical rambling quoting rules which do not apply. Count the number of migrants transitting through, Italy, Spain, Greece, Macedonia , Serbia , Germany, Hungary, Turkey but not stopping there as someone fleeing an oppressive regime would do, no they have to continue to cross further countries to get even close to the United Kingdom so all this piffle about fleeing oppressing isn't what it appears to be when held up to scrutiny but cold calculated cynical economic migration to pursue a nice westernised way of life.
Last edited by BetterTogether; 30-Aug-15 at 15:37.
1K.Orger
Tum te Tum
Squidge can't deal with these issues or resolve the causes - what she can do, what others are doing is call upon the people who CAN and are elected, paid, to do exactly that to get on and do it. Squidge can offer a different point of view from that being expressed by other posters here, Squidge can also personally do small things to ease the suffering of a few individuals, she can stand up for people, she can be part of a wider movement that demands action, challenges perceptions and encourages people to think wider than the pages of the tabloids.
But even if that's all Squidge can do, it's still better than nothing, it's still better than closing her door, shutting her eyes, sticking her figures in her ears and shouting "I can't hear you knocking" which is what we (Britain) appear to be doing right now. Because if we ( society) just do that then NOTHING changes.... Ever.
Banned (Sock Puppet of previously banned user)
You seem to be very adept at telling us how society should deal with this problem which is a political problem why shy away from proffering a reasoned articulate well thought out idea on how the cause could be dealt with. You don't seem to shy away from being highly opinionated on every other issue under the sun which are political decision which you claim to have no power over why stop short now. As for society not changing I'm not sure which highly insular bubble you live in but I notice society changing rapidly maybe it's not going quite how you imagine it should, perchance on this issue like others the majority tend to disagree with you but society most definitely is not standing still or doing nothing.
1K.Orger
Davth This article takes about the laws and some of the issues around refugees today and how they have
Changed.
https://www.opendemocracy.net/can-eu...ortress-europe
I didn't say society wasn't changing I said that if we as a society and actually as individuals do nothing, then nothing changes. I know you like to think I know everything BT, but honest I don't. I can't remember how many times I have said, repeatedly on many many subjects that I have no answers, that I don't know what the answers are. That's why we elect governments BT. I don't think we (Britain) should be doing nothing. I gave talked about some of the things that I think and others think we (British Government) COULD be doing, and that I would like to see us (Britain) doing, but I don't have the answers honey and I think you know that I know that too.
Last edited by squidge; 30-Aug-15 at 15:36.
Banned (Sock Puppet of previously banned user)
Interesting article there Squidge but I'd dearly love to know who is forcing these people to use traffickers as far as I can tell everything they do is a choice no one Forces them as stated in the article to do anything. Interesting to note how each of your posts totally ignores the reality of economic migrants of which there are many should we treat them the same ?
1K.Orger
I don't think I have said that we should. Economic migrants are not refugees and should not be treated as refugees. However, refugees are not economic migrants and are currently being treated as such! It is worth mentioning though that we can't be surprised that there are economic migrants when much of the world is still so poor.
Traffickers prey on desperate people and are very good at it. People traffickers are the worst criminals. They prey on people's fears and charge them for their hopes, with lies and deception. They take the money saved by people and they promise them a better life. Often abandoning them to a terrible fate as we have seen this week with 70 dead people in the back of a truck. Its a trick as old as can be.Fear forces people to use whatever route they have, it is the most powerful motivator. A lack of safe routes forces people to take their chances where they can. This is all well documented. traffickers, however seem to flourish when governments fail to do their jobs. Failing to deal with the refugee crisis means failing to deal with the traffickers too. It is reported that whenever there is a lack of safe routes then traffickers are left to fill the vacuum.
Last edited by squidge; 30-Aug-15 at 16:08.
Banned (Sock Puppet of previously banned user)
Can you explain how you'd separate the genuine asylum seekers from the economic migrants.
I mean obviously the ability to pay people traffickers and posses nice mobile phones and pick and choose what you eat isn't a very good way to tell them apart.
I'm not sure that piling people into the back of a track is a trick as old as can be considered refrigerated trucks in fact all trucks are modern machines .
People trafficking is a relatively modern phenomenon.
Before these halcyon days of modern European culture it would be more appropriate to call what used to occur slavery which as we both know still occurs within modern Europe and elsewhere and is probably the more abhorrent trade.
But people trafficking as we are now witnessing is a modern occurrence unless you are able to provide me with historical references to it.
As we know most people in these countries posses ID cards of some sort passports or some form of identification how do you explain so many of them having no form of identification what so ever.
Traffickers also prey on people full of hope for a new life in a prosperous well off country nothing to do with fear.
So explain how do you differentiate between these groups and how do you explain his relatively sudden mass exodus from countries which previously haven't seen the requirement to move en masse. Instability has been rife in parts of Africa for centuries now and the Middle East has historically been riven by tribal, religious and ethnic conflicts not much has changed.
Maybe you'd like to give us some insight into your first hand experience with the tribal infighting or religious fractions that are driving these regions into their current conditions.
Perhaps you've have prior experience within the Balkan enclaves and the ethnic cleansing the occurred there or maybe some experience of Saddams Regime prior to its toppling.
I mean you speak with such authority on the issues that drive these people to seek a new life surely you must of visited at least one of these regions to gain the first hand experience to speak so widely about letting these culturally vastly different people into our country with some of the issues that may well be created by doing this.
Last edited by BetterTogether; 30-Aug-15 at 16:39.
.Orger
So surely if a Syrian needs a visa to enter UK and does not have one then there is no problem with us not accepting them?
Im not sure it is a case of "lalalala we cant hear you knocking", its more a case of "we can hear you knocking but you are not welcome, now go away"
Banned (Sock Puppet of previously banned user)
The other day there was a report of some Bangladeshis picked up trying to get into the country, see it's very easy to say give asylum seekers from war zones asylum but when we have a situation where people from multiple countries are trying to force their way into the country by any means possible it becomes an issue.
We aren't dealing with a situation where people are showing with some form of identification for the greater part somewhat mysteriously all their papers seemed to have vanished so it's difficult to define where they actually originate from, effectively they have made themselves Nationless.
To those of an easier heart it appear that they are all poor desperate people fleeing war torn nations with nothing but the clothes on their backs, but to those of use somewhat more cynically inclined it seems like a mass of people deliberately destroying documents and telling the same tried and tested stories to gain access to European countries by any means possible.
Terry Waite was on TV this morning saying how he believes we are now in a Third World War, not like previous wars but one where terrorists can strike at will anywhere anytime.
If we are to believe what we are told it is people Dayesh and Al Shabab and their like who are profiteering from people trafficking and funnelling people uptoward our borders.
Not only does this take them in huge profits but creates a humanitarian crisis for countries to deal with.
But there is also another consideration to take into account, mixed into those tens of thousands of immigrants how many terrorists are making the journey hidden amongst them only biding their time to join up with others to wreak havoc and destruction on our citizens.
It's very easy to have an open heart and let everyone in and feel that those of us who wish to hold back and be more cautious are callous and hard hearted, but when the next inevitable terrorist atrocity is perpetrated somewhere in Europe will those who urge us to open our doors stand up and admit how wrong they've been.
It was only last week an atrocity was averted on a train by a handful of brave men standing up to an armed terrorist.
Are the Squidges and Fulmars of this world happy to appease their conscience at the cost of innocent lives within our own country.
How many people have to die before they accept there are genuine fears from the government and security services about letting so many people in unchecked.
No doubt their will be shouts of panic mongering from them and raising fears but these fears are real it's across Europe we see these atrocities occurring with more frequency.
The Wolf is at the door but they fail to see it snarling.
Last edited by BetterTogether; 30-Aug-15 at 18:00.
.Orger
Unfortunately, I feel that you, Better Together, are the one who is constantly full of negativity and fear and maybe your experiences in the armed forces has made you so. But you know, from my reading of the posts on here, you repeatedly do what you accuse others of doing, putting words and meanings into the words of Squidge (and myself) that were not intended and belittling people who do not hold the same view as yourself and others. No wonder that not many post with the treatment that they receive on here- basically being hammered. For all you know, there may be many who take an opposing view to yourself just as I accept that there will be many cheering you on who also are not posting. Poor Squidge who, in your eyes, cannot have an opinion unless having first hand experience of every war zone and desperate situation throughout the globe and solutions to same and is judged to be 'opinionated'. Of course, you are not opinionated are you?
''Are the Squidges and Fulmars of this world happy to appease their conscience at the cost of innocent lives within our own country. ''
Please point out where I said this in any of my postings as I certainly cannot find a record of it and no, I believe, as you do in robust anti-terrorism measures and keeping people safe, whoever they happen to be. (A wee reminder as an aside; the 2007 atrocities (the worst the UK has seen), were not carried out by 'migrants' so far as I recall.
Also, please tell me where I tried to foist my Christian beliefs on you or anyone else. I told you what the source of my motivation is, pure and simple. I know perfectly well that you hold those beliefs in contempt as you made it totally clear before when you spoke about 'Bronze Age' religions.
So please, for the sake of everybody, just stop and be a little more considered and considerate.
You can shout as loud as you like on here and think that having the last word means that you have somehow 'won' but the Politics section and this thread was meant to be a place of debate for folk of all different views. Since it is no longer that and continual wrangling on here is utterly pointless, then you rock on, as the saying goes.
.Orger
One of the 2007 Glasgow International Airport bombers was an immigrant.
I think the Lockerbie bombing of 1988 surpassed the London 2007 attack did it not?
Last edited by davth; 30-Aug-15 at 21:03.
1K.Orger
I expect our governments to be able to do both.
To be able to keep us safe and deal with the terrorist threats whilst also being able to meet their international obligations to provide a safe place for those fleeing persecution - refugees. I don't ask or expect them to do it all by themselves. I expect them to work proactively with the rest of the EU to make sure of both these things.
I don't know the answers but then I am not a member of the Government. I am a voter, and I expect those who are elected to our government to do the best for people, nationally, internationally, as the Government of the UK and a member of the EU.
Being one thing does not automatically prevent you doing another, so
It's possible to care about refugees and demand action without believing we should have free movement of everyone everywhere.
It's possible to care about your own family and still have compassion left over for others, for the families of those that wash up on beaches after yet another refugee crisis.
It's possible to speak up for refugees and demand action and yet care about the poor, pensioners, the sick and disabled here in Britain too.
It does appear that Britain, France and Germany are actually going to talk together to try to do something about that even if it is going to take 2 weeks to do this and even if they have tried before and failed. (Maybe they have been reading this board today lol.) I am glad that Britain is, finally, taking its place in resolving this crisis. That is what I have been hoping for and it's the very least that I expect of our government.
Last edited by squidge; 30-Aug-15 at 22:13.
.Orger
But If as you stated, we have no legal obligation to take these Syrians without a visa, why should we take them?
I dont see the role of the Government the same as you, I think that the Government should look after the UK's best interests, period.
Obviously taking in thousands of illegal immigrants is not in the best interests of the UK or its citizens.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks