The Migrant Crisis Troll-Free Thread.

[Darkon84]

Jude Law's team attacked and robbed at Calais Jungle camp.

 

Pretty much every time someone goes in there to try and help these immigrants, something like this happens  They really don't do themselves any favours.

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3467795/Jude-Law-s-security-team-attacked-mugged-migrants-cameras-stopped-Hollywood-star-left-jungle-camp-Calais.html

[Guest MattP]

Even more amusing watching Sky News, live speaking to a pro migrant activists and they start getting pelted with stones by migrants

[Wymsey]

Even more amusing watching Sky News, live speaking to a pro migrant activists and they start getting pelted with stones by migrants

Sky News always tries and get a reaction wherever they broadcast/interview publically.

 

Kay Burley is by far the worst.

[Buce]

Even more amusing watching Sky News, live speaking to a pro migrant activists and they start getting pelted with stones by migrants

And they wonder why we won't let them in.

[Thracian]

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/oct/29/britain-immigration-system-in-chaos-report-reveals

And the ever-increasing workload doesn't seem to be doing any good for medical staff either - and that's without mentioning the over 1000 medical vacancies at the current time, because of people leaving.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-devon-32991017

[Buce]

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/oct/29/britain-immigration-system-in-chaos-report-reveals

And the ever-increasing workload doesn't seem to be doing any good for medical staff either - and that's without mentioning the over 1000 medical vacancies at the current time, because of people leaving.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-devon-32991017

One of those links is from 2014, the other 2015, and only one of them is relevant to the migrant crisis.

[DJ Barry Hammond]

You know what to do.

It's probably more the case that nobody knows what to do... Given helping people in need will actually be considered a negative by some people due to an unknown 1-2% element that may well be contained within the migrants.

It would certainly be better to do something, even if it was essentially process their applications in a timely manor and send those that do not qualify for asylum back to a suitabally supplied camp closer to Syria boarder.

This would provide a suitable balance in terms of taking the immediate situation seriously enough and with compassion, whilst also sending a message that we are quite strict in our acceptance criteria.

[Rincewind]

Stop beiong calm and sensible.

[Buce]

He openly admits that his life wasn't in danger in Kabul. "Thank God we were always well off," he says with a smile, "I never worked a day in my life".

Afghan 'refugee' speaking from the Jungle.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-35693882

[DJ Barry Hammond]

He openly admits that his life wasn't in danger in Kabul. "Thank God we were always well off," he says with a smile, "I never worked a day in my life".

Afghan 'refugee' speaking from the Jungle.http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-35693882

The only quote I found was...

Afghan migrant Hayat Sirat told AP news agency: "Going to Britain... is what people [here] want. So destroying part of the Jungle is not the solution."

[Buce]

The only quote I found was...

Afghan migrant Hayat Sirat told AP news agency: "Going to Britain... is what people [here] want. So destroying part of the Jungle is not the solution."

Yeah, I'm not sure what happened there. Either they changed the report or I linked to the wrong story.

Edit: My bad, I linked the wrong story.

This is it: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-35385232

[Guest MattP]

It's probably more the case that nobody knows what to do... Given helping people in need will actually be considered a negative by some people due to an unknown 1-2% element that may well be contained within the migrants.

It would certainly be better to do something, even if it was essentially process their applications in a timely manor and send those that do not qualify for asylum back to a suitabally supplied camp closer to Syria boarder.

This would provide a suitable balance in terms of taking the immediate situation seriously enough and with compassion, whilst also sending a message that we are quite strict in our acceptance criteria.

 

They have already passed through numerous safe countries and refused to claim ayslum, why would we grant it to them? That doesn't make any sense at all.

 

I'm still to be given a reason by anybody as to why these people should be allowed into Britain and why the taxpayer should foot the bill for them?

[DJ Barry Hammond]

They have already passed through numerous safe countries and refused to claim ayslum, why would we grant it to them? That doesn't make any sense at all.

 

I'm still to be given a reason by anybody as to why these people should be allowed into Britain and why the taxpayer should foot the bill for them?

Well if you have processed an application and identified that the applicant have a genuine claim in line with our own rules is that not reason enough?

[Guest MattP]

Well if you have processed an application and identified that the applicant have a genuine claim in line with our own rules is that not reason enough?

 

They all have ample oppourtunity to asylum and have not done so.

 

Refugees don't have a right to choose which country they want to claim in.

If we seriously started accepting applications from this lot you'll have camps all over Northern France within months.

[DJ Barry Hammond]

They all have ample oppourtunity to asylum and have not done so.

 

Refugees don't have a right to choose which country they want to claim in.If we seriously started accepting applications from this lot you'll have camps all over Northern France within months.

But the simple fact is that these people are where they are, so we need to make some sort of decision by them - and push for a unified solution from Europe on the issue.

The situation has only occurred because it's grown and grown from elsewhere further south and east... if we can take a lead and deal with the situation efficiently and fairly, then perhaps other nations will follow suit.

We ultimately have to put our predjudice of where these people have come from aside and accept that this human life we're dealing with - it's not a game.

[Thracian]

It's probably more the case that nobody knows what to do... Given helping people in need will actually be considered a negative by some people due to an unknown 1-2% element that may well be contained within the migrants.

It would certainly be better to do something, even if it was essentially process their applications in a timely manor and send those that do not qualify for asylum back to a suitabally supplied camp closer to Syria boarder.

This would provide a suitable balance in terms of taking the immediate situation seriously enough and with compassion, whilst also sending a message that we are quite strict in our acceptance criteria.

[/quote

[Guest MattP]

But the simple fact is that these people are where they are, so we need to make some sort of decision by them - and push for a unified solution from Europe on the issue.

The situation has only occurred because it's grown and grown from elsewhere further south and east... if we can take a lead and deal with the situation efficiently and fairly, then perhaps other nations will follow suit.

We ultimately have to put our predjudice of where these people have come from aside and accept that this human life we're dealing with - it's not a game.

 

You also have to consider the long term impact of your decisions, look at the absolute disaster Angela Merkel's "welcome all" policy had, it resulted in millions more trying to make the journey, many more dying and social problems that will haunt Europe for decades to come.

 

You are exactly right, it isn't a game and accepting people from that migrant camp will result in more risk, more death and more social unrest in the future.

 

It's another classic example of the huge difference between actually doing good and wanting to do good.

[Thracian]

Some of you don't seem to appreciate the levels of evil contained on the guesswork 1-2% mentioned but just as likely to be higher than not.

But then it seems to be a fact that people ignore what they don't want to believe or be affected by.

Until it touches their own family and then they spend a lifetime trying to heal the pain by conducting campaigns - if they can!

Close the gates to all but a highly-selective and specified number from immigrants from each country, work to relocate all Middle-Eastern refugees in Arab lands most suited to them and continue to provide aid to help in that approach.

Services are so bad and so overloaded here anyway that doctors are talking about moving away from a National Health Service and making it a selective health service where GPs are only available to people who have achieved sufficient levels of sickness.

Seems like locals will be inevitably downgraded to a kind of second class citizen status where the NHS is concerned - perhaps they'll offer refunds (due to non-use of their contributions) for those who've tried to look after their health - perhaps at the same rate they themselves are paid thus allowing the conscientious ones to learn enough to treat themselves most of the time!

Otherwise the discarded will all be trying to catch flu to save them being replaced on the patient list. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-3472232/Now-GPs-strike-list-healthy.html

[leicsmac]

Some of you don't seem to appreciate the levels of evil contained on the guesswork 1-2% mentioned but just as likely to be higher than not.

But then it seems to be a fact that people ignore what they don't want to believe or be affected by.

Until it touches their own family and then they spend a lifetime trying to heal the pain by conducting campaigns - if they can!

Close the gates to all but a highly-selective and specified number from immigrants from each country, work to relocate all Middle-Eastern refugees in Arab lands most suited to them and continue to provide aid to help in that approach.

Services are so bad and so overloaded here anyway that doctors are talking about moving away from a National Health Service and making it a selective health service where GPs are only available to people who have achieved sufficient levels of sickness.

Seems like locals will be inevitably downgraded to a kind of second class citizen status where the NHS is concerned - perhaps they'll offer refunds (due to non-use of their contributions) for those who've tried to look after their health - perhaps at the same rate they themselves are paid thus allowing the conscientious ones to learn enough to treat themselves most of the time!

Otherwise the discarded will all be trying to catch flu to save them being replaced on the patient list. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-3472232/Now-GPs-strike-list-healthy.html

 

Really Thrac - we're seguing into a black and white morality play now? Good and evil are childish names for what people do, not what they are - the world is much more complex and subjective than that and it's an insult to the rich and varied nature of the universe to suggest that it is, quite frankly.

 

Of course your concerns about strain on services are reasonable (whether they're well-founded or not is something I don't know enough about to comment on), but why bring ridiculous notions of good and evil into the discussion?

[DJ Barry Hammond]

You also have to consider the long term impact of your decisions, look at the absolute disaster Angela Merkel's "welcome all" policy had, it resulted in millions more trying to make the journey, many more dying and social problems that will haunt Europe for decades to come.

 

You are exactly right, it isn't a game and accepting people from that migrant camp will result in more risk, more death and more social unrest in the future.

 

It's another classic example of the huge difference between actually doing good and wanting to do good.

Tell you what Matt... rather than attacking everyone else's suggestions, why not come up with a full proposal yourself - because despite being the leading poster in this thread so far, you've yet to put forward your own full and coherent opinion on what should be done?

I can gather it centres around the notion of "don't let any of the bastards in, we can't afford them" but that doesn't completely deal with the issue at hand.

Where do they get sent, what if those countries can't cope either, if they go back to neighbouring countries near the region does this not increase tension in the area and produce a bigger threat?

What happens to the thousands more that have and are travelling to various parts of Europe. Do we look to take an isolated stance on this or try for a unified solution? Should we be managing the conflicts in Syria better? Should we be cautious of what's happening in Yeman?

That fair?

[Guest MattP]

Tell you what Matt... rather than attacking everyone else's suggestions, why not come up with a full proposal yourself - because despite being the leading poster in this thread so far, you've yet to put forward your own full and coherent opinion on what should be done?

I can gather it centres around the notion of "don't let any of the bastards in, we can't afford them" but that doesn't completely deal with the issue at hand.

Where do they get sent, what if those countries can't cope either, if they go back to neighbouring countries near the region does this not increase tension in the area and produce a bigger threat?

What happens to the thousands more that have and are travelling to various parts of Europe. Do we look to take an isolated stance on this or try for a unified solution? Should we be managing the conflicts in Syria better? Should we be cautious of what's happening in Yeman?

That fair?

 

Sure, for a start you don't implement policy that encourages the mass flow of people, be that a failed war in Libya (in hindsight paying off Libya was probably a better option( http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/libya/7973649/Gaddafi-Europe-will-turn-black-unless-EU-pays-Libya-4bn-a-year.html), inaction in Syria or silly comments from Merkel and her ilk.

 

The smugglers are the ones we should have been dealing with at the start, these evil bastards who fill up a  boat with enough petrol to get near the European coast so the travellers would have to be rescued should have been hammered with an iron fist at the start, given the vast majority of the migrants in Calaid are from North Africa this was the mode of transport they took, how we still aren't patrolling these waters to any sort of extent is pretty shambolic, not just for the death and destruction it causes but more for the fact that we shouldn't be allowing people to profit from this misery.

 

In terms of Syria and Yemen I'd like to see us set up a civilian safe zone gaurded by military force, hopefully with the full support of the Arab league but even if not then by Western intervention, unfortunately that's probably no longer possible now as with the USA's withdrawal from the World stage we've allowed Putin to take the lead in the country and he has absolutely no problem whatsoever in carpet bombing the place in order to leave the rest of the World with a choice of propping up Assad or supporting ISIS.

 

Don't start with the ""don't let any of the bastards in" lark - I've never said that and no else has, we should always take a share of genuine refuges fleeing warzones, I think we have certainly done the right thing taking our from camps in Lebanon rather than just opening our borders to hoardes of young men who were just rich enough to pay the smugglers to get them across and thankfully we haven't seen scenes like Cologne or Stockholm on our streets because of it. These people have nowhere to go, there condition is desperate, they certainly aren't people who have walked through numerous safe countries already turning down asylum to get to their choice of safe country.

 

An easy solution? There isn't one, but turning Europe into a giant refugee camp certainly isn't it either and we don't need to go into the huge elephant in the room which is that many of these people are Sunni Muslim, a religion that when imported to any country on mass has always resulted in significent problems for the inhabitants, as we haven't been invaded for near on 1000 years our people have levels of trust that almost defy the behaviour of humanity in our World.

 

As far as I'm concerned the migrants should be Germany's problem now, they invited them, I'm not interested in sharing their liberal guilt because of things they did 70 years ago.

 

He who would do good to another must do it in minute particulars. General good is the plea of the scoundrel, hypocrite and flatterer - William Blake.

[DJ Barry Hammond]

Matt - you should notice that you've started off by saying what you won't do / what shouldn't have happened. Then when you've come to suggesting something you'd like to happen you declare it highly unlikely, so that's helpful. Finally, you then declare that this should really be Germany's problem not ours...

...hardly constructive debate is it!

So let me go back over what I would suggest as immediate action that the UK government could look to take;

*Increase funds and resources in this area so that we can deal with people applying for asylum quicker (at both camps but with preference to those in the Lebanese one. We look to reduce the facilities in the French camp whilst processing) accepting those that qualify, but using strict criteria and being prepared to turn away those that don't. The money from this could possibly come from the aid budget.

*Ensure proper 'online' records are kept of applications so that these details can be shared both internally across UK government agencies and with other EU countries where appropriate.

*Where applications are sucessful, get these people setup as quickly as possible...the sooner they can get their life back on track the sooner they can become a net contributor.

*get an understanding on the trends of people coming to the camps - both official and unofficial so that can be used to base future policy.

*ensure those that do not qualify are returned to a suitable area promptly (given the ceasefire in operation in Syria that could even be the country of origin).

This approach would have some key benefits in that it shows positive action to a humanitarian crisis, but also shows a degree of strength in that we will send people back that do not qualify - and in sending them back, this news will filter through the region and may well stem the flow of people looking to make it to the UK without a genuine claim.

We should also liase closely with our EU partners concerning our actions throughout so that they may consider whether they put similar action in place. Equally, where our EU Partners have alternative suggestions we should listen and consider amending our stance if deemed appropriate.

The goal over the long term would be to develop a unified strategy across nations, but at present a short term solution is needed more readily and who knows, it might lead a path to what the long term solution is.

[Guest MattP]

I think it's fair to mention things that haven't happened because you are asking me to provide things I would do and had I been in a position of power a lot of the things that caused this wouldn't have happened. also I think it's totally fair to say Germany hould deal with a lot of this, they were the ones who said they would house, feed and cloth 1.5million people despite having no mandate from it's people or the people of Europe to do so, they can shoulder that burden,

 

I appreciate your thoughts on this but virtually everything you have said there is already supposed to be happening or is just a bit cliche, talk of understanding the people and the trends of people entering the camps doesnt really mean anything, we already know they are mainly single men from either Eritrea, Sudan or Syria, what understanding are you trying to achieve that we already don't know?

 

Although the most important thing here is the people of Britain, over 50% of the people who voted did so for the Tories or UKIP, so I don't think there is any justification whatsoever for anyone to decide for themselves that they would start inviting people into the country that the people have decided they don't want.

 

None of what you have said will actually deal with anything anyway, the Syrian "ceasefire" is a joke, there will still be mass movement of people this summer, borders are still going up across Europe, nothing is being solved in the Middle East and I can't seriously believe anyone could be so gullible as to thinking any Calis based asylum seeker would return home upon not being given refuge.

 

In fact you've not really offered up a single solution to anything. It read more like a pitch to stay in the European Union rather than a passage to solve the migrant crisis.

[Thracian]

Really Thrac - we're seguing into a black and white morality play now? Good and evil are childish names for what people do, not what they are - the world is much more complex and subjective than that and it's an insult to the rich and varied nature of the universe to suggest that it is, quite frankly.

 

Of course your concerns about strain on services are reasonable (whether they're well-founded or not is something I don't know enough about to comment on), but why bring ridiculous notions of good and evil into the discussion?

There is nothing childish in describing the sort of things I've witnessed on YouTube this last few days as "evil". Indeed, if I could have found a stronger word I'd have used it.

Black or white doesn't come into it in any sense. Evil is evil and needs no excusing by anyone.

[Guest MattP]

Really Thrac - we're seguing into a black and white morality play now? Good and evil are childish names for what people do, not what they are - the world is much more complex and subjective than that and it's an insult to the rich and varied nature of the universe to suggest that it is, quite frankly.

 

Of course your concerns about strain on services are reasonable (whether they're well-founded or not is something I don't know enough about to comment on), but why bring ridiculous notions of good and evil into the discussion?

 

Sorry but that is nonsense.

 

The sympathisers of groups like IS who believe it is their right to behead children, enslave people, rape women and throw gays off buildings are evil and we shouldn't insult people for saying so.