27 people confirmed to have died after boat sinks in the channel

[brighton_eagle]

Originally Posted by GreatGonzo

Well in 2020 41% of asylum applications were accepted, 39% of appeal cases in the courts that year were successful. So from those figures, over 1/3 of those who are claiming asylum are refused by the home office and then the courts.

That is of those who come here and make a claim for asylum. There are many more who go underground, often trafficked for the purpose of being put into modern slavery.

I don't think you can say all those trying to get into the UK are doing so legitimately.

But you said:

"I have no issue with the UK accepting an number of people who are fleeing countries where their lives and freedoms are in danger, but how many of those trying to cross the channel are in that category?"

The category being "people who are fleeing countries where their lives and freedoms are in danger". Nothing in your post is relevant to that.

[Fen Eagle]

I could probably if I searched find filthy right wing sites that argue against any reporting quoted on here. My posts are based on facts.

[Hpalace]

Originally Posted by Herr Colonpharter

. . but are any smugglers getting nicked and what becomes of them if they are? They must be there or thereabouts when a boat is launched?

Yes. Over 1500 since January.

[brighton_eagle]

Originally Posted by Fen Eagle

I don’t do keyboard warrior fighting. I’ll state again I am not a racist and there is nothing I have posted that is racist. Instead of name calling explain to me where I’m going wrong ? Explain and tell me what’s not true about my posts.

Originally Posted by Fen Eagle

Whilst sad (genuinely) to get to Britain they have already been through at least 4 safe countries to claim asylum. It’s the benefits we hand out that make them risk there lives. We are the most easiest form of a free ride they will get. For every thousand that make it here if one is a terrorist waiting to make a bomb. Then sorry no close the borders.

You can debate whether or not this is fundamentally racist (I think it is personally), but what you can't debate is that it's full of inaccuracies that are easily disproved if you care to spend even just a few minutes doing some research.

[cockneyrebel]

The U.K. takes a shameful amount of asylum seekers, the vast majority of refugees are in poorer countries. The idea that the U.K. is an “easy ride” is also nonsense with pitiful benefits, the denial of the right to work while you await the outcome, grim accommodation and then a citizenship test. And what a terrible thing it would be if we did give asylum seekers an “easy ride”.

Also what is “legitimate” depends on your morality I guess. Escaping economic impoverishment for a better life is legitimate in my view.

Germany took a million Syrian refugees and the U.K. government and some of the population make a big deal out of tens of thousands crossing the channel.

Once asylum seekers get here we then have the horrendous system of putting them in prison. It’s beyond belief and was set up by labour. Starmer is now silent on that issue and the tories welcome it. People who have been tortured in some cases put in prisons where there have been sexual assaults, rape and suicide. I remember going to a demonstration outside one with women and children inside holding up written signs saying help at the windows.

We live in a world with disgusting inequality, and this is the result, where desperate people will take any measures possible to try for a better life.

[0.bj]

Not a racist, just posts Nazi tropes that have been doing the rounds since the 1930’s.

[brighton_eagle]

Originally Posted by Fen Eagle

My posts are based on facts.

Hahaha.

It’s the benefits we hand out that make them risk there lives - £39.63 a week

We are the most easiest form of a free ride they will get. - In the year ending December 2020, 41% of initial decisions resulted in a grant of asylum or other form of protection.

For every thousand that make it here if one is a terrorist waiting to make a bomb. - This is by definition speculative and not fact.

[Worksop Palace]

Originally Posted by smileysmith

Yes

Silly boy

[smileysmith]

Originally Posted by Worksop Palace

Silly boy

lol.

Tory.

[Golf Boy]

Originally Posted by brighton_eagle

You might want to read up on this:

To view the link you have to Register or Login

The vast majority stay in the first country they get to, and the rest in other countries. A very small proportion end up making it to the UK.

What would make a refugee continue from the first country, and then another and so on?

[Joe85]

Originally Posted by brighton_eagle

Hahaha.

It’s the benefits we hand out that make them risk there lives - £39.63 a week

We are the most easiest form of a free ride they will get. - In the year ending December 2020, 41% of initial decisions resulted in a grant of asylum or other form of protection.

For every thousand that make it here if one is a terrorist waiting to make a bomb. - This is by definition speculative and not fact.

The bomb statement alone proves what a terrified little cherub he really is.

[Little Fozzie]

Originally Posted by GreatGonzo

Is this different to migrants transiting through another country and dying of starvation and exposure on the borders of Belarus and Poland?

I have no issue with the UK accepting an number of people who are fleeing countries where their lives and freedoms are in danger, but how many of those trying to cross the channel are in that category?

This is really quite a shitty stance to take on this. People don't put their lives at risk in a dinghy unless they are utterly desperate. I'd like to see how you get on restarting your life in a country where you don't have anything, don't speak a word of the language, and don't know anyone.

It's also shameful that those who do make it here are treated disgustingly by the home office, and the fascist in charge of it that you helped put there.

[brighton_eagle]

Originally Posted by Golf Boy

What would make a refugee continue from the first country, and then another and so on?

What do you imagine would?

[Worksop Palace]

Originally Posted by smileysmith

lol.

Tory.

You write that like it’s supposed to upset me or something.

We’re talking about 27 people who drowned and all you and others can do is start bumping your gums about how people voted 2 years ago.

Sad much?

[Golf Boy]

Originally Posted by brighton_eagle

What do you imagine would?

Asylum rejected, immigrant quotas in the countries they are in would be my first guess.

[Maz]

Originally Posted by Golf Boy

What would make a refugee continue from the first country, and then another and so on?

Any number of things. Do you really have to ask?

[Ogilvy]

I fully accept the below is a fairly uneducated POV on this:

I can’t help feeling anyone paying 1000s to get to Britain are doing a disservice to those really in need.
Those fleeing war and persecution are travelling miles across safe lands to get to a safe land why?

I absolutely think this country needs to step up and take its share of the real refugees, but for me, it’s the old thing about giving a homeless man a £10er or a shelter/charity the money to help solve the bigger problem and get to the absolute needy and the bigger answer. How even when we were in the EU is the pull of this country so much more than the countries they have travelled through. We should be negotiating with these countries around the safe passage and care of these, not feeding the gangsters greed

[Maz]

Originally Posted by Golf Boy

Asylum rejected, immigrant quotas in the countries they are in would be my first guess.

And language would be my first. Friends and family in the target country would be the second. Et cetera et cetera. You want to leave for a better life, not just a life.

[Hpalace]

Originally Posted by Golf Boy

What would make a refugee continue from the first country, and then another and so on?

Language, friends, family etc etc.

[Maz]

Originally Posted by Hpalace

Language, friends, family etc etc.