Stupid World

[Indiana_Jones]

Spicy thread is spicy.

[pritch]

An asylum seeker is a person looking for protection because they fear persecution, or they have experienced violence or human rights violations.

A refugee is a person who asked for protection and was given refugee status. They may have been resettled in another country and/or be waiting for resettlement.

Those crossing the English Channel in small boats ... have (at NO stage) asked for asylum ANYWHERE in their travels. Nor have they applied for (let alone granted) refugee status.

Illegal immigrants (Pro-immigrant liberals often prefer the term “undocumented immigrant”) are also called illegal aliens, and are foreign-born people who do not possess a valid entry visa, or any other immigration/travel documentation.

Close but there is no requirement that they seek asylum in a neighbouring country. Many (most?) will seek a country where they can communicate, and English is taught in school in many countries now.

[TheDemonLord]

Close but there is no requirement that they seek asylum in a neighbouring country. Many (most?) will seek a country where they can communicate, and English is taught in school in many countries now.

I believe the requirement is 'First Safe Country'.

And it's got nothing to do with Language and everything to do with getting a free ride.

[husaberg]

Close but there is no requirement that they seek asylum in a neighbouring country. Many (most?) will seek a country where they can communicate, and English is taught in school in many countries now.

.............................

There is no general, recognised first safe country principle in international law.
Countries may not simply deny entry to an asylum seeker, and must consider claims individually
before deciding to return an asylum seeker to a third country. Unless there is a guarantee of fair asylum procedures in transit countries that are deemed ‘safe,’ denying an asylum seeker entry based on a first safe country principle constitutes indirect refoulement, and is a violation of the first sending country’s obligations under international law

[TheDemonLord]

there is a guarantee of fair asylum procedures in transit countries that are deemed ‘safe,’

So, like France then?

[FJRider]

Close but there is no requirement that they seek asylum in a neighbouring country. Many (most?) will seek a country where they can communicate, and English is taught in school in many countries now.

If they don't go through the required process ... and/or if they become an illegal immigrant. they then get rejected as being asylum seeker. Their case gets harder to prove.

And ... when the occupants of those small boats CAN PAY $5000 per head for a seat on a boat ... it's a sure bet they're not exactly hard up for money.

It's easy to hide in a crowd. England is where they can move around and not be seen to be out of place in the crowd. The smart ones do well on the backs of the less fortunate/wealthy ... and can do well for themselves. Legality comes at a price.

And if the Poms don't know where they came from ... they can't send them back.

[FJRider]

Burn them.

Due to the low standard of transportation they buy seats on ... they burn themselves. Or just simply drown.


A lot of bodies are getting washed up on the beaches of various countries already.


Actual numbers getting ashore (alive) in England unstopped is unknown. And I'd bet that all the Armed Forces in England have Units engaged in intercepting their travels.

[pritch]

And ... when the occupants of those small boats CAN PAY $5000 per head for a seat on a boat ... it's a sure bet they're not exactly hard up for money.

They were talking about this on the BBC the other day. It's common for a family to scrape together enough money to send one son to seek asylum, the hope being they will get a job and start sending money home. Sometimes it works.

James O'Brien's 'Full Disclosure' podcast #63 is an interview with Waheed Arian who as a boy left Afghanistan, almost died of TB in Pakistan, but eventually made it to England as a fifteen year old. In 2021 when the interview was conducted he was, at age 38, an A&E Doctor in the NHS. He was also running a charity which assists third world doctors by providing medical/surgical information and advice using smart phones and Whatsapp.

The interview covers some of the topics that have arisen here, such as why Britain would be the destination of choice for some.

[TheDemonLord]

They were talking about this on the BBC the other day. It's common for a family to scrape together enough money to send one son to seek asylum, the hope being they will get a job and start sending money home. Sometimes it works.

So, young men, on an adventure wanting a better economic outlook.

Not fleeing War or Persecution.

Just wanting Cash.

James O'Brien's 'Full Disclosure' podcast #63 is an interview with Waheed Arian who as a boy left Afghanistan, almost died of TB in Pakistan, but eventually made it to England as a fifteen year old. In 2021 when the interview was done he was, at age 38, an A&E Doctor in the NHS. He was also running a charity which assists third world doctors by providing medical information and advice using smart phones etc.

Perhaps James should interview Rebaz Mohammed.
or Lawangeen Abdulrahimzai
or Badreddin Abdalla Adam

(The list goes on)

[pritch]

So, young men, on an adventure wanting a better economic outlook.

Not fleeing War or Persecution.

Just wanting Cash.

Economic migrants? I particularly mentioned Afghanistan to head that off at the pass. Ah well...

When he was five the family escaped Afghanistan via one of the mountain routes used by the Mujahadeen to smuggle arms into Afghanistan. The smugglers back-loaded people escaping the conflict. Adventure it was though, the group was attacked from the air by the Russians on three occasions.

The doctor also explains why he picked Britain and the career advice he was given early on once there. You really should listen, it could correct some of your misapprehensions.

[sugilite:Me]

So, young men, on an adventure wanting a better economic outlook.

Not fleeing War or Persecution.

Just wanting Cash.

Yep, men being the traditional hunter gatherers leaving their families reluctantly to forge a better future. The UK's current laws support that. Why demonize them for it? Go after the pollies wanting cheap workers.

[TheDemonLord]

Yep, men being the traditional hunter gatherers leaving their families reluctantly to forge a better future. The UK's current laws support that. Why demonize them for it? Go after the pollies wanting cheap workers.

I have no problem with anyone who wants to do that.

There is a process that you have to go through, incidentally, the same process Me and my Family had to go through to get here.

If they are purely economic Migrants, then they get to apply to emigrate and if they meet the criteria that the host country sets out and are accepted, then they get to come.

What they don't get to do is skip the line illegally and lie their way into the country.

[TheDemonLord]

Economic migrants? I particularly mentioned Afghanistan to head that off at the pass. Ah well...

When he was five the family escaped Afghanistan via one of the mountain routes used by the Mujahadeen to smuggle arms into Afghanistan. The smugglers back-loaded people escaping the conflict. Adventure it was though, the group was attacked from the air by the Russians on three occasions.

The doctor also explains why he picked Britain and the career advice he was given early on once there. You really should listen, it could correct some of your misapprehensions.

When was the Afghanistan/Russian Conflict? The 1980s? So well before the Blair changes in Immigration policy in the late 1990s. And well before the mass-migration issue of the last 10 years.

Oh dear.

Seems your example is completely irrelevant to the current issue of illegal boat crossings.

Also - I noticed you focused on your singular example of someone who has done well in the UK, fair enough.
But you ignore the 3 examples (one last week) of illegal Migrants murdering people in the UK.

Perhaps it is you who really should listen to the people who live next to the illegal Migrants. You should listen to how their towns have changed, how certain types of crime has gone up, how pre-teen girls are approached and solicited in broad daylight by people who hold 3rd world beliefs. You should hear the anger at Millions of pounds of tax payer money being used to put them up in hotels, whilst there are homeless veterans. I could go on.

See, that's the issue, the likes of James O'Brien, Gary Linekar at al don't live in the working class areas of the UK, they don't actually have to experience the problems that are caused by the Migrants there. They will occasionally meet a middle-class Migrant, like the one you mentioned, who came here some time ago and has done well for themselves and they believe that all Migrants are like that.

They aren't.

[sugilite:Me]

I have no problem with anyone who wants to do that.

There is a process that you have to go through, incidentally, the same process Me and my Family had to go through to get here.

If they are purely economic Migrants, then they get to apply to emigrate and if they meet the criteria that the host country sets out and are accepted, then they get to come.

What they don't get to do is skip the line illegally and lie their way into the country.

Ahem, but I thought lies were all good in your book? The largest conservative news organization in the world undermining democracy barely causes not a ripple in your World, but migrants getting into the UK under false pretenses - man the parapets, we are under attack!!

[TheDemonLord]

Ahem, but I thought lies were all good in your book? The largest conservative news organization in the world undermining democracy barely causes not a ripple in your World, but migrants getting into the UK under false pretenses - man the parapets, we are under attack!!

One is illegal, the other is not.

Pretty simple really.

In addition, entering illegally constitutes a form of Queue jumping, which is the most grievous sin in Britain.