Benefits a magnet to migrants.

Craterloads said:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...ignorant-about-almost-everything-9825116.html
Click to expand...

Exactly, people are just uninformed. Immigration to the UK is very small, and not significantly different to historic levels. Let alone Great a titian was formed by immigration and that is what makes it so great.

And then there are those that are just plain racist, or fear foreigners, or need someone to blame for their own shortcomings. Can't get a job but that sky engineer who came round was polish. Blame the immigrants! Then there is the good old sterotyping. Some Muslim was found guilty of paedophilia, then probsbly most Muslims are paedophilies!


Ther is no space for a rational discussion when someone has arrived at their position through irrational beliefs.


Immigration and the EU are the least of Britians concerns.
 
troops said:
That also works both ways, what you deem rational others see as irrational.
Click to expand...

A rational belief is based on facts and reason, not prejudice. 1/3rd of Britons freely admit to being prejudiced http://www.natcen.ac.uk/our-research/research/british-social-attitudes/
, and thus their position in irrational and untenable in a serious discussion (let alone the others who are prejudiced but don't admit to it, that is the "I'm not racist but" crowd)

All my beliefs are based on facts and evidence.
 
D.P. said:
All my beliefs are based on facts and evidence.
Click to expand...

All? Really? I know mine aren't - I wouldn't have the time to find information on everything I believe so I use cognitive processes that maybe extrapolate from things I have explored - rightly or wrongly.

It's funny you use the word 'beliefs' because by their definition beliefs are often taken without evidence.
 
Antony101 said:
The more eastern Europeans that are willing to clean my car for £5 the better, let them all in.
Click to expand...

You wont be saying that when you go into Sainsbury's and you're the only English person in there including the tills of which nobody speaks proper English, like what is happening in Canterbury :mad:. That's the only thing that annoys me, people who come here should learn to speak fluent English before getting citizenship. All the petrol stations in this area nobody speaks English, some bloke kept on talking to me over and over again and I just wanted my damn receipt. Turns out he wanted me to buy Doughnuts, of which I wasn't interested.

Canterbury-Herne Bay-Whitstable is being over run by immigration in the last two years!
 
Last edited:
The problem is simple, too many people coming in to fast, so the strain on the NHS, Housing and schools is to great.

Block all immigration for a few years and deport all French people
 
Xordium said:
All? Really? I know mine aren't - I wouldn't have the time to find information on everything I believe so I use cognitive processes that maybe extrapolate from things I have explored - rightly or wrongly.

It's funny you use the word 'beliefs' because by their definition beliefs are often taken without evidence.
Click to expand...

Feel free to exchange belief with opinion if you want to argue semantics.
 
Hikari Kisugi said:
Out of interest, are these people legally in France?
Or does the EU allow travel through a state, to allow for migrant processing/ asylum processing in another?
Click to expand...

In summary, international Law allows movement of refugees to any country, there is no first country of entry ruling. However, EU law does allow EU countries to return refugees to their first country of entry within the EU. So it is only thanks to EU law that there is a strong possibility to transfer refugees. With regards to the refugees arriving in the UK through France, international law says that travel through a country is not reasonable ground for seeking asylum in that country.



All those that jabber on that asylum seekers must seek asylum at the first country they get to are spouting factless garbage. The fact is :
"There is no obligation under the refugee convention or any other instrument of international law that requires refugees to seek asylum in any particular country. "
Click to expand...

Moreover, international laws have no mention of "first country of entry/asylum". Instead, there is an understanding that a country can not refuse asylum to a refugee that meets the criteria (genuine risk of persecution), therefore an asylum seeker need only seek asylum at the first safe country they get to, but they don't have.

The mere fact that the person has passed through another country does not necessarily mean there was an opportunity to claim asylum; if an agent planned the journey and the person was hidden in a vehicle for the duration of it, for example, there is unlikely to have been any realistic opportunity for the person to approach the authorities.
Click to expand...


It is actually EU agreements that facilitate the resettlement of asylum seekers to other EU countries

So if you are a genuine refugee your claim will not be rejected on the basis that you did not claim asylum in the first country you came to, but you may be passed from one country to another before your claim is determined and the effect of the 2004 act is that it is extremely difficult for an asylum seeker to challenge removal from the UK to a country deemed to be "safe"
Click to expand...


If Britain was to leave the EU it would be even harder to control asylum seekers. It is only by EU agreements that there is a strong mechanism to return refugees to their first country of entry within the EU.
Furthermore, the suggestion to return genuine refugees to where they came from is illegal by international law, regardless of the EU.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/libertycentral/2010/sep/21/claim-asylum-uk-legal-position



And when talking about asylum seekers again it is useful to understand the numbers involved instead of following daily mail headlines:
http://migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/briefings/migration-uk-asylum
  • in 2013 there were on 23,507 asylum application
  • In 2013, 64% of initial decisions were refusals. 78% of rejected applicants lodged appeals, with a success rate of only 24%. So for those not good at math that makes about 48% total acceptance rate. Making around 11 thousand successful applicants, or 0.017% of the UK population.
  • Asylum seekers aren't entitled to many benefits available to UK nationals, the benefits available are not stipulated by international or EU law.
 
Last edited:
Acme said:
Clearly you don't care much about your paintwork. :p
Click to expand...

They actually do a good job though, hand washed, polished and then hand dried, the amount of cars they get in a day is insane.

I give it a good wash myself every few weeks anyway.
 
Last edited:
robgmun said:
Unbelievable, no wonder you want to take chances with our country but if it all goes belly up you don't suffer the consequences :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Unbelievable that you have such ridiculous attitude:rolleyes:


You are the one that wants to turn Britain upside down and wipe out decades of progress.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom