General News

[Trav Le Bleu]

4 hours ago, st albans fox said:

I think to definitively call him a Russian asset is over stating it. However, he clearly doesn’t want to do anything which will upset putin to the extent that he might release the photos ! 

Really? I'm wondering what his activation code is.

[Jon the Hat]

At this point what credibility would anything that Russia leaked really have?  If you can't tell AI fake news from real news, then it loses its power.

[Sly]

17 hours ago, LFox99 said:

Kids and a Holocaust survivor included

It’s stupidity like this, that drives the hate crimes to begin with. 
 

We all have different opinions.

We won’t always agree.

We won’t always see eye to eye.

 

The world population needs to pull itself together, take a long hard look at itself and acknowledge that it’s okay to have differing opinions, respect that and work toward finding common ground.

 

Whatever the question is, violence is never the answer unless you’re a knuckleheaded idiot or someone in a dick swinging contest that things they can bully themselves around (Trump I’m looking at you).

 

Why people can’t take an approach that is collaborative and work together, rather than killing and maiming each other is really beyond me. 

It’s not about getting perfect alignment to move forward to stop all this unnecessary killing, fighting, death and destruction. It just needs a mutual commitment to look at the bigger picture and work toward it.

[st albans fox]

2 hours ago, Jon the Hat said:

At this point what credibility would anything that Russia leaked really have?  If you can't tell AI fake news from real news, then it loses its power.

A fair proportion of the stuff that you’ve seen coming out of war zones is AI/edited/staged and yet 99% viewing  think it’s real. 

Edited 3 June 2025 by st albans fox

[Dr The Singh]

8 hours ago, Facecloth said:

The refugee convention overrides the one you highlight as soon as the asylum process starts. 

 

I hope this clarifies things.

 

Also not sure why the post is confusing, I referenced Debs bringing it up, you continued the comparison. The rest wasnt confusing, it made many points and ideas on how to deal with the current crisis, none of which you engaged with.

 

We both want people to stop making dangerous trips across the channel, probably for different reasons. We can deal with it humanely, sensibly and with a long term view to continue to manage the situation, as I previously mentioned, or we can keep messing about with these gimmicky tactics the last government, this government and Reform are all fixated on.

I know that Facie, anyone can seek asylum, once they are on the land of where they want to seek it.  However getting to the land by illegal means, means upto that point they are illegally migrating.  I hope thats clear.

[leicsmac]

1 hour ago, Sly said:

It’s stupidity like this, that drives the hate crimes to begin with. 
 

We all have different opinions.

We won’t always agree.

We won’t always see eye to eye.

 

The world population needs to pull itself together, take a long hard look at itself and acknowledge that it’s okay to have differing opinions, respect that and work toward finding common ground.

 

Whatever the question is, violence is never the answer unless you’re a knuckleheaded idiot or someone in a dick swinging contest that things they can bully themselves around (Trump I’m looking at you).

 

Why people can’t take an approach that is collaborative and work together, rather than killing and maiming each other is really beyond me. 

It’s not about getting perfect alignment to move forward to stop all this unnecessary killing, fighting, death and destruction. It just needs a mutual commitment to look at the bigger picture and work toward it.

And, once again, the above isn't just for the sake of "being nicer" or for its own moral sake. 

 

It's a matter of necessity.

[leicsmac]

On the above:

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c787xv2xy1zo

 

A Chinese Harvard graduate's speech calling for unity in a divided world, delivered days after the US vowed to "aggressively" revoke Chinese students' visas, has sparked mixed reactions in the US and her home country.

"We don't rise by proving each other wrong. We rise by refusing to let one another go," Jiang Yurong said on Thursday, the same day a US federal judge blocked the Trump administration's ban on foreign students at Harvard. 

 

...."If we still believe in a shared future, let us not forget: those we label as enemies - they, too, are human. In seeing their humanity, we find our own," said Ms Jiang, who spent her final two years of school at Cardiff Sixth Form College in Wales before going to Duke University in the US for her undergraduate degree. 

 

That's the kind of sentiment required for our species going forward. 

[leicsmac]

In other news, the Korean elections are today after the last nationalist got rightfully thrown out on his ear for doing nationalist things. (Something other places in the world could learn from there.)

 

 Foreign policy obviously high on the agenda, but that the country came very close to veering back into a dictatorship last December and a possible age demographic crisis are also big issues. 

[davieG]

59 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

On the above:

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c787xv2xy1zo

 

A Chinese Harvard graduate's speech calling for unity in a divided world, delivered days after the US vowed to "aggressively" revoke Chinese students' visas, has sparked mixed reactions in the US and her home country.

"We don't rise by proving each other wrong. We rise by refusing to let one another go," Jiang Yurong said on Thursday, the same day a US federal judge blocked the Trump administration's ban on foreign students at Harvard. 

 

...."If we still believe in a shared future, let us not forget: those we label as enemies - they, too, are human. In seeing their humanity, we find our own," said Ms Jiang, who spent her final two years of school at Cardiff Sixth Form College in Wales before going to Duke University in the US for her undergraduate degree. 

 

That's the kind of sentiment required for our species going forward. 

Will she be free to speak or even alive by the end of the year?

[Jon the Hat]

15 minutes ago, davieG said:

Will she be free to speak or even alive by the end of the year?

I'm not sure Trump is killing them just yet.  

[leicsmac]

16 minutes ago, davieG said:

Will she be free to speak or even alive by the end of the year?

If you're referring to the US, then Jon has it (mostly) right above. (The "mostly" being that the Trump administration wouldn't kill her, but rather do a lot to make her wish she were dead, if they were so inclined.)

 

If you're referring to the Chinese (or specifically their leadership), there's no reason whatsoever to suggest what Jiang-Xiǎojiě said here would not fit with their current goals and so annoy them

[Torquay Gunner]

4 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said:

I'm not sure Trump is killing them just yet.  

It wouldn’t surprise me if Trump had fantasies about playing himself in The Purge franchise films.  He’s got the new founding father nazi look down to a tee.

[davieG]

14 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said:

I'm not sure Trump is killing them just yet.  

 

8 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

If you're referring to the US, then Jon has it (mostly) right above. (The "mostly" being that the Trump administration wouldn't kill her, but rather do a lot to make her wish she were dead, if they were so inclined.)

 

If you're referring to the Chinese (or specifically their leadership), there's no reason whatsoever to suggest what Jiang-Xiǎojiě said here would not fit with their current goals and so annoy them

Wasn't thinking of the leaders/countries more individuals that disagree with her being there. The audacity of a Chinese national and a woman as well suggesting bad things about a country she's guest in. Tut tut.

[leicsmac]

30 minutes ago, davieG said:

 

Wasn't thinking of the leaders/countries more individuals that disagree with her being there. The audacity of a Chinese national and a woman as well suggesting bad things about a country she's guest in. Tut tut.

That's a fair point. Hopefully it won't be the case. 

[Jimothy]

29 minutes ago, Dr The Singh said:

I know that Facie, anyone can seek asylum, once they are on the land of where they want to seek it.  However getting to the land by illegal means, means upto that point they are illegally migrating.  I hope thats clear.

So under your logic they have zero way of getting here. We take no asylum seekers and leave it to the rest of the world? What makes us special we don't have to do our part? This attitude, the closing of legal routes to these people is exactly why we've ended up in the situation. Add to that the lack of action from the previous government in processing claims and brexit taking us out the Dublin convention has created this perfect storm of boat crossing, hotel dwelling chaos.

 

If a person was to claim travel here under different pretences and then claim asylum, that would be illegal. So what do want these people to do. We've put them between a rock and hard place.

 

Also you do realise, you could travel to France in a boat, and providing you show documentation on arrival then you've travelled there legally. Claiming asylum replaces providing a passport and other documentation. Do you consider your crossing in your own boat illegal because you haven't 

caught a plane and gone through passport control at the airport? Of course you don't. So why can't these people make there own way here and then provide documentation or start the asylum process on arrival?

[Dr The Singh]

7 minutes ago, Facecloth said:

So under your logic they have zero way of getting here. We take no asylum seekers and leave it to the rest of the world? What makes us special we don't have to do our part? This attitude, the closing of legal routes to these people is exactly why we've ended up in the situation. Add to that the lack of action from the previous government in processing claims and brexit taking us out the Dublin convention has created this perfect storm of boat crossing, hotel dwelling chaos.

 

If a person was to claim travel here under different pretences and then claim asylum, that would be illegal. So what do want these people to do. We've put them between a rock and hard place.

 

Also you do realise, you could travel to France in a boat, and providing you show documentation on arrival then you've travelled there legally. Claiming asylum replaces providing a passport and other documentation. Do you consider your crossing in your own boat illegal because you haven't 

caught a plane and gone through passport control at the airport? Of course you don't. So why can't these people make there own way here and then provide documentation or start the asylum process on arrival?

There is no logic, its fact, unfortunately these people that travel by illegal means are illegal, i'm not saying its right or wrong.  However the point your missing is, law states, no matter the method, anyone can seek, or apply for asylum as soon as they hit our land.

[Jimothy]

29 minutes ago, Dr The Singh said:

There is no logic, its fact, unfortunately these people that travel by illegal means are illegal, i'm not saying its right or wrong.  However the point your missing is, law states, no matter the method, anyone can seek, or apply for asylum as soon as they hit our land.

I'm pretty sure I'm not missing the point that they can apply for asylum   I've said this multiple times.

 

I feel like your missing many points and have no solutions to the issue.

So what's your solution to all this? You call these people illegal, you don't want to give them any other way of getting here, you don't want to offer other ways of claiming asylum here or before they arrive. Crossing the channel in a small boat is extremely dangerous, yet it doesn't put them off, so clearly heavy handed approaches are just going to make them find a work around.

[Dr The Singh]

49 minutes ago, Facecloth said:

I'm pretty sure I'm not missing the point that they can apply for asylum   I've said this multiple times.

 

I feel like your missing many points and have no solutions to the issue.

So what's your solution to all this? You call these people illegal, you don't want to give them any other way of getting here, you don't want to offer other ways of claiming asylum here or before they arrive. Crossing the channel in a small boat is extremely dangerous, yet it doesn't put them off, so clearly heavy handed approaches are just going to make them find a work around.

I have no solution, nor claim to have, nor have I said I don't want to give people another way, all I have done is re-iterate the current situation with the labelling of illegal immigration.  I totally agree, we do need to find a better way for people to see asylum, but I also don't like people being able to just ruck up at our door step.

 

I have personal experience of this situation, people from my family have come by boats, non of them were legit asylum seekers, all applied and went on the run.  One was a drug lord in the punjab, and now is one of the biggest drug dealers and pimp in Birmingham.  Why they came here, it's simple risk and reward, they are economic migrants, the money they earn, has made them and there families very wealthy.  On the other hand during the 80's after the Sikh genocide by the Indian authorities, UK, US, and Canada were saviours, the asylum process saved there lives.

[Jimothy]

56 minutes ago, Dr The Singh said:

I have no solution, nor claim to have, nor have I said I don't want to give people another way, all I have done is re-iterate the current situation with the labelling of illegal immigration.  I totally agree, we do need to find a better way for people to see asylum, but I also don't like people being able to just ruck up at our door step.

 

I have personal experience of this situation, people from my family have come by boats, non of them were legit asylum seekers, all applied and went on the run.  One was a drug lord in the punjab, and now is one of the biggest drug dealers and pimp in Birmingham.  Why they came here, it's simple risk and reward, they are economic migrants, the money they earn, has made them and there families very wealthy.  On the other hand during the 80's after the Sikh genocide by the Indian authorities, UK, US, and Canada were saviours, the asylum process saved there lives.

So your relative broke the law by going on the run, not by coming here and seeking asylum.

 

If you don't like people just rocking up in boats, maybe start to suggest some solutions rather than just bitching about the situation like that's going to fix it. Calling them illegal and saying you don't like it won't stop them coming. Listening to Farage and his mates clearly won't work either as they've made the situation worse. As you stated the asylum process saved lives so we need to find a way to continue this whilst minimising the instance like your drug lord relative. But bunging them in hotels, threatening Rwanda and brexit haven't worked or have made the situation worse. Calling them illegal and demonising them all hasn't worked. For example if the government, both Labour and Tory actually stepped up the processing speed, maybe your relative would never had had the chance to go on the run. 

 

So you can call them "illegal" if you want but the facts remain they aren't to blame for the situation, we are as a country. We've allowed it to get like this and now we just go round in circles complaining about the method of arrival rather than addressing any of the reasons they come here and addressing any of the failings in the process that exacerbate the situation.

[The Hitman]

It seems that the Crimean bridge is under attack by yet another brilliant secret operation by the Ukrainian special forces. 
 

I really hope they manage to bring it down. 

[leicsmac]

5 hours ago, leicsmac said:

In other news, the Korean elections are today after the last nationalist got rightfully thrown out on his ear for doing nationalist things. (Something other places in the world could learn from there.)

 

 Foreign policy obviously high on the agenda, but that the country came very close to veering back into a dictatorship last December and a possible age demographic crisis are also big issues. 

Latest on this: Lee Jae-myung set to win more or less decisively, if exit polls are accurate.

 

Good news.

[leicsmac]

Also, Sarwar really should be taking legal action against Farage for slander. 

[Dr The Singh]

1 hour ago, Facecloth said:

So your relative broke the law by going on the run, not by coming here and seeking asylum.

 

If you don't like people just rocking up in boats, maybe start to suggest some solutions rather than just bitching about the situation like that's going to fix it. Calling them illegal and saying you don't like it won't stop them coming. Listening to Farage and his mates clearly won't work either as they've made the situation worse. As you stated the asylum process saved lives so we need to find a way to continue this whilst minimising the instance like your drug lord relative. But bunging them in hotels, threatening Rwanda and brexit haven't worked or have made the situation worse. Calling them illegal and demonising them all hasn't worked. For example if the government, both Labour and Tory actually stepped up the processing speed, maybe your relative would never had had the chance to go on the run. 

 

So you can call them "illegal" if you want but the facts remain they aren't to blame for the situation, we are as a country. We've allowed it to get like this and now we just go round in circles complaining about the method of arrival rather than addressing any of the reasons they come here and addressing any of the failings in the process that exacerbate the situation.

 getting abit persie, I can bitch as much as like.  If you don't like do one .  They are illegal get over it, if you can't except do something about it and get off your arse instead of posting on a forum of no significance.   The rest of the stuff, I agree.

Edited 3 June 2025 by Dr The Singh

[Jimothy]

9 minutes ago, Dr The Singh said:

 getting abit persie, I can bitch as much as like.  If you don't like do one .  They are illegal get over it, if you can't except do something about it and get off your arse instead of posting on a forum of no significance.   The rest of the stuff, I agree.

Well I mean you're wrong. The entry can only be judged as illegal of they don't present themselves to the authorities. And if you can't accept (not except) that the get off you're arse and do something about it 

Edited 3 June 2025 by Facecloth

[Dr The Singh]

48 minutes ago, Facecloth said:

Well I mean you're wrong. The entry can only be judged as illegal of they don't present themselves to the authorities. And if you can't accept (not except) that the get off you're arse and do something about it 

I'm too lazy to get off my arse.  You daft Clothie, I already stated this, peeps are illegal until they seek asylum, after that the legality is determined upon the conclusion of there application.  All you have stated is we don't put them to prison, or penalise them, which is right, we should treat them humanely.