Anarchy in Calais

[ExRes]

Cat? Is that the word that is starting to spring to mind? I love guessing games.

No, I think the clue is in the 'spring', I was thinking Coil ?, Trampoline ? or maybe Onion

 

[Senex]

So your assertion is that the media publishing pictures/video footage of 1500/2000 'incursions' confirms that all of those are economic migrants. It's hard to believe that somebody here would actually post such a statement, unless of course you want to believe that they are all on the scrounge. That makes it easy to dismiss all the desperate struggle that these unfortunates are trapped in. Not your problem. Mmmm.

Clearly the pictures cannot distinguish between those who may have a genuine claim for asylum in the first safe country that they reach and those who are simply economic wanderers -- though in both cases unless they have been processed on the EU border where they entered they cannot be legally at Calais. As for incursions, why do you put this term within quotation-marks? They are certain making incursions into what is supposed to be a secure area, and in a good many cases very obviously causing damage in so doing, both the access and the damage being offences. And then we have the accounts from the lorry-drivers (more on the radio in the last couple of days) of the damage to their vehicles, the threats of violence, and the costs to their firms if the illegals do manage to stow away successfully (in their terms). Whatever sympathy one might have for genuine asylum seekers vanishes rather swiftly when one sees the antics of the Calais mob (some of which almost amount to a form of economic terrorism just as much as that of the French strikers burning their tyres on the roads).

 

[Tetchytyke]

Labour's policies didn't help the situation

Labour brought in the juxtaposed border controls. Now I'm sure you're not arguing that the juxtaposed border controls are the issue, so I'm not really sure what your point is.

These people were getting to Britain before Labour moved the UK border to Calais. Whether that's better or worse depends on your point of view.

the continued crisis of migrants crossing the Med, have demonstrated Europe has failed to grasp the reigns and take control.It is this continued emphasis on free migration over targeted migration that will forever undermine Europe's ability to curb these issues in the long-term, not to mention their emphasis on humanity over responsibility.

These people are crossing the Med because they are fleeing war zones, generally. Most of the migrants are coming from Syria, Libya, Eritrea, Somalia. You might be able to guess what the common theme in these countries is.

I'm also not sure what you're blithering on about, attacking a focus on "humanity over responsibility". Germany takes ten times the number of asylum seekers the UK does. Other much smaller countries, like Sweden, take more than we do.

I'm not sure what you think "Europe" should do differently? Let them drown in the Med?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

those who may have a genuine claim for asylum in the first safe country that they reach and those who are simply economic wanderers -- though in both cases unless they have been processed on the EU border where they entered they cannot be legally at Calais.

So you're another one who thinks the UK shouldn't take any asylum seekers just because we're further away from the war zone?

That said, I do love the way the frothy kippers manage to argue these people are both "stealing our jobs" and "scrounging on benefits". Hint: someone can't do both.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

there are people who have worked and paid taxes most of their lives

Does that mean we can kick anyone out who doesn't pay taxes in the UK?

Excellent, can we start with the non-dom Viscount Rothermere, who moved his business to Bermuda to avoid paying tax on the profits?

 

[RichmondCommu]

No, I think the clue is in the 'spring', I was thinking Coil ?, Trampoline ? or maybe Onion

Ah yes, how silly of me Just a thought, perhaps it was water? Or leak? But then again surely that would have to be sprung rather than spring?

 

[Senex]

So you're another one who thinks the UK shouldn't take any asylum seekers just because we're further away from the war zone?

That conclusion doesn't follow from the section of my text that you quoted. We should indeed continue to take in asylum seekers (though I'm very suspicious about the numbers who claim to be such). It is very much to our credit that we gave a home to people like Karl Marx (which whose views, as you may well expect, I profoundly disagree).

 

[Aldaniti]

A certain word is starting to spring to mind.

Jolly good. Keep practising - that TV programme COUNTDOWN are always looking for new contestants. Rachel Riley is a bit of a looker http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/tv/news...spells-arse-on-countdown.html#~pkvnowB9AyHqY8 - wouldn't be a bad day out to be honest....

 

[RichmondCommu]

Jolly good. Keep practising - that TV programme COUNTDOWN are always looking for new contestants. Rachel Riley is a bit of a looker http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/tv/news...spells-arse-on-countdown.html#~pkvnowB9AyHqY8 - wouldn't be a bad day out to be honest....

A bit of a looker? I would say our Rachel is a full on looker! That said I wouldn't swap my pocket rocket for anyone else!

 

[Tetchytyke]

That conclusion doesn't follow from the section of my text that you quoted. We should indeed continue to take in asylum seekers

...but only asylum seekers who arrive directly to the UK and don't pass through any other country first?

 

[TheKnightWho]

Jolly good. Keep practising - that TV programme COUNTDOWN are always looking for new contestants. Rachel Riley is a bit of a looker http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/tv/news...spells-arse-on-countdown.html#~pkvnowB9AyHqY8 - wouldn't be a bad day out to be honest....

Are you going to answer my questions?

 

[meridian2]

So you're another one who thinks the UK shouldn't take any asylum seekers just because we're further away from the war zone?

You asked the question, not me. Kindly provide an answer, and learn to debate with civility. 'Blithering' is hardly conducive to a reasoned debate, and I'd like to think I'm not debating with a 10-year old who should know better.

As I said, it's Europe that has failed, not the UK, Border Force or other. Europe should be asking itself that question, and the answer that it has come up with is free migration. Please explain why that is preferred to targeted migration.

 

[RichmondCommu]

Are you going to answer my questions?

What do you think about Rachel Riley?

 

[Tetchytyke]

As I said, it's Europe that has failed, not the UK, Border Force or other. Europe should be asking itself that question, and the answer that it has come up with is free migration. Please explain why that is preferred to targeted migration.

I'm not sure what the straw-man distinction between "free" or "targeted" migration has to do with the price of fish. These people are not coming from within the EU, they are coming from outside the EU.

So if "Europe" (whatever or whoever that is) has "failed", what do you consider "success"? Letting them drown in the Med? Forcing Italy to take them all?

Or are you yet another frothing kipper who simply things anyone born beyond Calais should bally well go home, old chap?

 

[Antman]

Labour brought in the juxtaposed border controls. Now I'm sure you're not arguing that the juxtaposed border controls are the issue, so I'm not really sure what your point is.

These people were getting to Britain before Labour moved the UK border to Calais. Whether that's better or worse depends on your point of view.



These people are crossing the Med because they are fleeing war zones, generally. Most of the migrants are coming from Syria, Libya, Eritrea, Somalia. You might be able to guess what the common theme in these countries is.

I'm also not sure what you're blithering on about, attacking a focus on "humanity over responsibility". Germany takes ten times the number of asylum seekers the UK does. Other much smaller countries, like Sweden, take more than we do.

I'm not sure what you think "Europe" should do differently? Let them drown in the Med?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


So you're another one who thinks the UK shouldn't take any asylum seekers just because we're further away from the war zone?

That said, I do love the way the frothy kippers manage to argue these people are both "stealing our jobs" and "scrounging on benefits". Hint: someone can't do both.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Does that mean we can kick anyone out who doesn't pay taxes in the UK?

Excellent, can we start with the non-dom Viscount Rothermere, who moved his business to Bermuda to avoid paying tax on the profits?

We don't let them in to start with.

And nobody should be drowning in the Med so we destroy the unseaworthy wrecks that people traffickers have been cramming people into.

 

[Johnuk123]

Are you yet another frothing kipper who simply things anyone born beyond Calais should bally well go home, old chap?

I think you and a couple of others are the only ones frothing.

 

[Aldaniti]

A bit of a looker? I would say our Rachel is a full on looker! That said I wouldn't swap my pocket rocket for anyone else!

Aye, having given that a nanosecond of further consideration, you're 100% right!

 

[TheKnightWho]

What do you think about Rachel Riley?

I couldn't care less. The fact the poster in question seems unwilling to engage is quite telling though.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I think you and a couple of others are the only ones frothing.

Care to back that up? You're the one who seems terrified of them.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

We don't let them in to start with.

And nobody should be drowning in the Med so we destroy the unseaworthy wrecks that people traffickers have been cramming people into.

So they get shot by ISIS, caught in a warzone etc. - is that acceptable?

 

[Metrailway]

So your assertion is that the media publishing pictures/video footage of 1500/2000 'incursions' confirms that all of those are economic migrants. It's hard to believe that somebody here would actually post such a statement, unless of course you want to believe that they are all on the scrounge. That makes it easy to dismiss all the desperate struggle that these unfortunates are trapped in. Not your problem. Mmmm.

If the migrants at Calais are genuine asylum seekers why have they not claimed asylum in France? As far as I am aware France is a 'safe' country.

If she wishes to, Britain has the legal right to deport the Calais migrants back to France (or more correctly Italy) even if they manage to claim asylum in the UK. This is because under UK and EU law, the EU member state into which the migrant first arrived into the EU will be responsible for determining the claim for asylum.

There is a good article in the Guardian regarding the legal aspects of this: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/libertycentral/2010/sep/21/claim-asylum-uk-legal-position

===

One of the major problems of Schengen is the varying quality of external border checks. For example, the Italians have very weak controls in place compared to other countries such as Spain. So countries without an external border are dependent on the Italians, Greeks, Spanish etc to police their borders and administer any migrants correctly. The problem is that the Italians and Greeks can't cope with the sheer number of migrants.

Barely reported in the UK press, but both France and Denmark have reintroduced border controls, although both are quite weak due to Schengen. Although not as bad as Calais, there are around a few hundred migrants (most en-route to Britain, Germany, and the Nordic countries) stuck at Ventimiglia in Italy with the French denying entry.

If you travel by rail, passport controls, usually dressed up as custom checks, are common if you enter from Italy to Austria or Switzerland (which is not in the EU but in Schengen) for the past two or so years. Also now common to encounter passport controls on trains from Italy to France and Germany to Denmark.

===

That said, I do love the way the frothy kippers manage to argue these people are both "stealing our jobs" and "scrounging on benefits". Hint: someone can't do both.

Someone can do both if they work on the black or grey market. Circa 10% of the UK economy is the black market. Black market businesses are able to undercut genuine employers reducing the number of bona fide jobs available. Of course being employed on the black or grey market means you are off the system so are able to claim certain benefits whilst working.

 

[meridian2]

I'm not sure what the straw-man distinction between "free" or "targeted" migration has to do with the price of fish. These people are not coming from within the EU, they are coming from outside the EU.

So if "Europe" (whatever or whoever that is) has "failed", what do you consider "success"? Letting them drown in the Med? Forcing Italy to take them all?

Or are you yet another frothing kipper who simply things anyone born beyond Calais should bally well go home, old chap?

That's 2 questions you've asked that you haven't answered.

Do continue as you seem to know my train of thought intimately.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

We don't let them in to start with.

And nobody should be drowning in the Med so we destroy the unseaworthy wrecks that people traffickers have been cramming people into.

That would mean that many (obviously, not all) of these people end up either stranded in Libya, or getting killed in warzones in their own countries. Are you happy for that to happen?

 

[meridian2]

That would mean that many (obviously, not all) of these people end up either stranded in Libya, or getting killed in warzones in their own countries. Are you happy for that to happen?

Are you happy for genocides to be used as some-sort of emotional blackmail for migrants bloating populations? That's what's happening. Some clerk is making these decisions based on factors that do not concern him. It's time people realise how dispassionately these migrants are treated by the EU, who are only concerned with the freedom of movement.

 

[TheKnightWho]

Are you happy for genocides to be used as some-sort of emotional blackmail for migrants bloating populations? That's what's happening. Some clerk is making these decisions based on factors that do not concern him. It's time people realise how dispassionately these migrants are treated by the EU, who are only concerned with the freedom of movement.

So they aren't getting killed? It's only emotional blackmail if it's not relevant or not true. It's happening, and it's why they're fleeing.

 

[Metrailway]

A boat carrying around 600 migrants has capsized off Libya.

Rescue under way as migrant boat capsizes off Libya

Rescuers are searching for hundreds of migrants in the Mediterranean after a boat carrying as many as 600 people capsized off the coast of Libya.

The Irish navy said "significant loss of life" was feared and Medecins Sans Frontieres confirmed "many deaths".

But the Italian coast guard and the UN refugee agency say about 400 have been rescued and 25 bodies recovered so far.

More than 2,000 migrants are said to have died in 2015 trying to cross the Mediterranean to reach Europe.

Wednesday's incident occurred when the packed fishing boat ran into rough weather about 15 miles (25km) from the Libya's coast.

A distress call was picked up in Sicily and one of the first ships on the scene was an Irish navy vessel. But as she launched her boats, the migrants apparently moved to one side of the fishing boat, causing it to capsize.

At least three other ships and three helicopters were reported to have arrived in the area shortly afterwards.

(Read More)

 

[Antman]

I couldn't care less. The fact the poster in question seems unwilling to engage is quite telling though.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Care to back that up? You're the one who seems terrified of them.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


So they get shot by ISIS, caught in a warzone etc. - is that acceptable?

Another boat has sunk in the Med, hundreds are likely to have perished. Is that acceptable?

 

[Groningen]

Another boat has sunk in the Med, hundreds are likely to have perished. Is that acceptable?

Would you be the engineer of a train with defect breaks? Would you leave a station with serious overcrowding? Do you really think they will be loved in several countries and be part of society or that they will pull together in their own little ghetto. In Rosenheim, Germany 147 people were pulled from a train from Italy.

 

[Antman]

Would you be the engineer of a train with defect breaks? Would you leave a station with serious overcrowding? Do you really think they will be loved in several countries and be part of society or that they will pull together in their own little ghetto. In Rosenheim, Germany 147 people were pulled from a train from Italy.

Of course not, that's why I suggested these unseaworthy wrecks should be destroyed and the people traffickers put out of business

 

[TheKnightWho]

Of course not, that's why I suggested these unseaworthy wrecks should be destroyed and the people traffickers put out of business

That didn't answer my question.

 

[Antman]

That didn't answer my question.

Of course it does, they are far more likely to drown in the Med than be shot by ISIS as you suggested

 

[TheKnightWho]

Of course it does, they are far more likely to drown in the Med than be shot by ISIS as you suggested

Are you serious? There are also worse things than death, as you know.

 

[meridian2]

So they aren't getting killed? It's only emotional blackmail if it's not relevant or not true. It's happening, and it's why they're fleeing.

And you think the EU care? So long as they're crossing borders freely, there will always be a Med crisis/Calais crisis.

 

[Antman]

Are you serious? There are also worse things than death, as you know.

Surely France isn't that bad?