Are you trying to suppress my right to free speech?
My official functions (which are quite lowly) have nothing to do with what I talk about on here, so get lost.
Migration and Asylum
- Thread starter Grey
- Start date
Are you trying to suppress my right to free speech?
My official functions (which are quite lowly) have nothing to do with what I talk about on here, so get lost.
The Europe Union has increasingly morphed into a mechanism for allowing mobile labour to drive down wages and promote job insecurity. It shouldn't come as any surprise to you to learn that there is a degree of hostility towards taking in large numbers of highly questionable economic migrants who will have this affect in our economies as well as making demands on creaking infrastructure. I think you knew that though. I also think you anticipated the response you'd get. I also believe you had some pre-prepared agenda in the hope of provoking the response you got
I do think you reveal your own base prejudices though, when you seek to tar the UK as a single entity based around what myself and Clive posted, and more latterly EC, whilst turning a blind eye to a similar sentiment that was expressed by the only Irish poster who has so far offered an opinion. Perhaps you'd be so good as to explain why you picked out the UK and ignored Ireland? Nationalism is rarely anything other than ugly.
Look at what you posted again - "I'm getting the impression from the remarks above that the UK can't be counted on to make a constructive contribution to making even a humanitarian contribution to ameliorating this crisis."
So would I be justified in saying the same about Ireland?
"I'm getting the impression from reading Icebreaker that Ireland can't be counted on to make a constructive contribution to making even a humanitarian contribution to ameliorating this crisis." - how stupid does that sound to you?
As regards you posting anti British stuff into cyberspace, it doesn't bother me as much as you might think. I do feel it reflects poorly on you though, and the European Commission. Perhaps you're lucky that they don't hold you to the same standards of professional accountability in Europe that you would be in the UK. If a public sector administrator with a policy related job posted derogatory stuff about Ireland and the Irish people in such a sweeping manner as you have done, they'd be borderline to keep their job if discovered doing it. They had better have a good explanation, and "private opinions" doesn't work as a defence.
One area where I do completely agree with you though is the role played by the French and the British (albeit I note that you fail to acknowledge Sarkozy). There can be little doubt that they have been instrumental in massively exacerbating the situation in North Africa in particular, in what I can only describe as one of the most blatantly cynical pieces of foreign policy (Sarkozy) or stupid pieces of vendetta (Cameron) that I can remember. I don't accept any excuses for this to be honest, as it was entirely foreseeable. Indeed, Gadaffi was formally operating as a forward border post for the UK as part of the agreement to reintegrate Libya, and even used to brag about how he could "turn Europe black" if he stopped policing his ports. I do think there is an argument here that runs along the lines of the 'polluter pays principle' which we see in international environmental law. The architects of the north African crisis are very much the French and British, and for some very, very poor reasons too
Absorption isn't a solution as we can't take the populations of the middle east and Africa so unless we can do something radical regarding an asylum homeland on a managed piece of Mediterranean real estate, we're going to have to start sinking boats in ports as we eventually did with the Somali pirates
I do think you reveal your own base prejudices though, when you seek to tar the UK as a single entity based around what myself and Clive posted, and more latterly EC, whilst turning a blind eye to a similar sentiment that was expressed by the only Irish poster who has so far offered an opinion. Perhaps you'd be so good as to explain why you picked out the UK and ignored Ireland? Nationalism is rarely anything other than ugly.
Look at what you posted again - "I'm getting the impression from the remarks above that the UK can't be counted on to make a constructive contribution to making even a humanitarian contribution to ameliorating this crisis."
So would I be justified in saying the same about Ireland?
"I'm getting the impression from reading Icebreaker that Ireland can't be counted on to make a constructive contribution to making even a humanitarian contribution to ameliorating this crisis." - how stupid does that sound to you?
As regards you posting anti British stuff into cyberspace, it doesn't bother me as much as you might think. I do feel it reflects poorly on you though, and the European Commission. Perhaps you're lucky that they don't hold you to the same standards of professional accountability in Europe that you would be in the UK. If a public sector administrator with a policy related job posted derogatory stuff about Ireland and the Irish people in such a sweeping manner as you have done, they'd be borderline to keep their job if discovered doing it. They had better have a good explanation, and "private opinions" doesn't work as a defence.
One area where I do completely agree with you though is the role played by the French and the British (albeit I note that you fail to acknowledge Sarkozy). There can be little doubt that they have been instrumental in massively exacerbating the situation in North Africa in particular, in what I can only describe as one of the most blatantly cynical pieces of foreign policy (Sarkozy) or stupid pieces of vendetta (Cameron) that I can remember. I don't accept any excuses for this to be honest, as it was entirely foreseeable. Indeed, Gadaffi was formally operating as a forward border post for the UK as part of the agreement to reintegrate Libya, and even used to brag about how he could "turn Europe black" if he stopped policing his ports. I do think there is an argument here that runs along the lines of the 'polluter pays principle' which we see in international environmental law. The architects of the north African crisis are very much the French and British, and for some very, very poor reasons too
Absorption isn't a solution as we can't take the populations of the middle east and Africa so unless we can do something radical regarding an asylum homeland on a managed piece of Mediterranean real estate, we're going to have to start sinking boats in ports as we eventually did with the Somali pirates
Last edited:
I agree and not ganging up. To take two posters and label them "the uk" is out of order.
what at us particularly two faced about it all is that the same poster once accused me of "demonising all Muslims" in a post where I clearly highlighted Islamists and those of a certain opinion.
I don't quite take the economic view of warbler and wish it was possible to take those in who have risked so much but it's a simple and obvious issue of precedent.
what at us particularly two faced about it all is that the same poster once accused me of "demonising all Muslims" in a post where I clearly highlighted Islamists and those of a certain opinion.
I don't quite take the economic view of warbler and wish it was possible to take those in who have risked so much but it's a simple and obvious issue of precedent.
Clivex, for you to be sensitive about something said on this forum is a complete joke given the abuse you routinely dish out to all and sundry.
Warbler, you are very prickly about issues of nationality. You don't like Irish people passing comment on UK matters, which is fair enough in some respects, but you don't even like Irish people commenting on Irish matters. I remember you reacting vehemently to an innocent observation I made a while back that the Irish economy was starting to pick up again.
You also seem to have a hang-up about me being a European civil servant. The simple fact is you don't know what you're talking about when you say that in the UK I would risk getting the sack because you don't know what work I do. I am as aware as anyone that I need to stay out of matters related to my job, so don't be fretting on my behalf. If you are really worried about it we can discuss it further by PM.
I know that clivex is certain that I'm anti-British and suspects me of being an IRA supporter or at least a fellow traveller, but he is utterly and completely wrong about that. Sinn Feiners would have me down as a West Brit.
I started the thread because I'm in despair at the failure of Europeans to show some humanity to a group of people who are in trouble and badly need help. The UK government has been taking a particularly strong line and I wanted to see what people on here make of it. I was actually hoping for a very different reaction to the one I've got so far. I could have mentioned France but I didn't see the point when we don't seem to have many French people on the forum. There are plenty of others of course who could also get a mention, especially Hungary, which is building a fence along its frontier with Serbia.
I understand that no country is enthusiastic about accepting more refugees and in that respect the Irish government is no different to all the other countries keeping their heads down and hoping the problem goes away. And I agree with you that an influx of migrants from African countries might depress wages, especially in a country like the UK where the current ideology frowns on labour legislation and it is not used as a tool to prevent undercutting.
I don't have any answers to the problem, certainly not any easy or palatable ones, but I don't think we can just leave Italy, Greece and Malta to deal with the situation on their own.
Warbler, you are very prickly about issues of nationality. You don't like Irish people passing comment on UK matters, which is fair enough in some respects, but you don't even like Irish people commenting on Irish matters. I remember you reacting vehemently to an innocent observation I made a while back that the Irish economy was starting to pick up again.
You also seem to have a hang-up about me being a European civil servant. The simple fact is you don't know what you're talking about when you say that in the UK I would risk getting the sack because you don't know what work I do. I am as aware as anyone that I need to stay out of matters related to my job, so don't be fretting on my behalf. If you are really worried about it we can discuss it further by PM.
I know that clivex is certain that I'm anti-British and suspects me of being an IRA supporter or at least a fellow traveller, but he is utterly and completely wrong about that. Sinn Feiners would have me down as a West Brit.
I started the thread because I'm in despair at the failure of Europeans to show some humanity to a group of people who are in trouble and badly need help. The UK government has been taking a particularly strong line and I wanted to see what people on here make of it. I was actually hoping for a very different reaction to the one I've got so far. I could have mentioned France but I didn't see the point when we don't seem to have many French people on the forum. There are plenty of others of course who could also get a mention, especially Hungary, which is building a fence along its frontier with Serbia.
I understand that no country is enthusiastic about accepting more refugees and in that respect the Irish government is no different to all the other countries keeping their heads down and hoping the problem goes away. And I agree with you that an influx of migrants from African countries might depress wages, especially in a country like the UK where the current ideology frowns on labour legislation and it is not used as a tool to prevent undercutting.
I don't have any answers to the problem, certainly not any easy or palatable ones, but I don't think we can just leave Italy, Greece and Malta to deal with the situation on their own.
Last edited:
I have never suspected you of IRA sympathies. Happy to correct that
That's good.
Meanwhile I'm copying this, Warbler, from your post on the 'election' thread, because it seems more appropriate to respond to it here:
I have not pretended that the "UK is singularly in some great immigrant hating minority". Traditionally the UK has been one of the more welcoming countries for immigrants. However I do think that the current UK government is making itself unpopular in some member states by telling them they must do more to deal with the current crisis while at the same time refusing to share the cost. The scenes at Calais are disturbing, no doubt about it, but they are merely part of a much bigger situation.
Meanwhile I'm copying this, Warbler, from your post on the 'election' thread, because it seems more appropriate to respond to it here:
I have not pretended that the "UK is singularly in some great immigrant hating minority". Traditionally the UK has been one of the more welcoming countries for immigrants. However I do think that the current UK government is making itself unpopular in some member states by telling them they must do more to deal with the current crisis while at the same time refusing to share the cost. The scenes at Calais are disturbing, no doubt about it, but they are merely part of a much bigger situation.
OK lets try and do some fag packet calculations as no one really knows the scale of this problem (or if they do, they won't admit it)
population of Africa is estimated to be 1.16Bn
of these about 15% are males aged between 15-30 = 174M
Of these perhaps 10% will have aspirations to migrate, albeit most that will be from rural areas to urban Africa
South Africa in particular has taken up a lot, (and its grim)
You look at the population projections to the end of this century and it will be a close run thing if Nigeria overtakes China (that's the scale we're talking about)
Lets work on just 1% of this 174M however attempting to migrate to Europe in a generation which I'll define as 15 years
So that's 1.74M
What if I'm wrong (and I will be almost by dint of having to be)
What if it's 2% and the migration figure 3.48M instead
and that's just for Africa, and males, and those aged 15-30
If the UK has 12.67% of the EU population and equitable model would be for us to take about 440,000
David Cameron opposed the expansion towns first put forward in 2007, and scrapped them when he came to office. 8 years later he eventually relented to build an extension to Ebbsfleet. He's fallen chronically behind in all house building targets and we are after all talking about a country that can't even decide about building a third runway on an airport. Does he really stand a cat in hells chance of building Bristol by the year 2025? And even if he did, what then. The next generation from an expanding population are on the move
The population of Africa is expected to be 1.9Bn by 2050. He'll have to build Birmingham now
This simply isn't sustainable
The only other option is to ask Nicola Sturgeon to take them as she's indicated that the Scots need asylum seekers. Not sure what she'll scoop mind you. I had the grissly misfortune to visit a place called Hillbrow a decade ago. It's an inner area of Jo'burg known locally as little Lagos. Now admittedly I had someone with me who was authorised to defend me using whatever was necessary, but there could be little doubt that if they weren't there I'd have lasted all of one minute. As he explained, these people will cut your finger off to get a ring. They feel they have to though, because if they don't attack you first, someone else will, and their opportunity will have been lost. Do we want this? urm .... no. When the South African police (those well known shrinking violets) won't go into an area, and hand it over instead to a commando unit backed up with private security shoot first folk you know you have a problem.
population of Africa is estimated to be 1.16Bn
of these about 15% are males aged between 15-30 = 174M
Of these perhaps 10% will have aspirations to migrate, albeit most that will be from rural areas to urban Africa
South Africa in particular has taken up a lot, (and its grim)
You look at the population projections to the end of this century and it will be a close run thing if Nigeria overtakes China (that's the scale we're talking about)
Lets work on just 1% of this 174M however attempting to migrate to Europe in a generation which I'll define as 15 years
So that's 1.74M
What if I'm wrong (and I will be almost by dint of having to be)
What if it's 2% and the migration figure 3.48M instead
and that's just for Africa, and males, and those aged 15-30
If the UK has 12.67% of the EU population and equitable model would be for us to take about 440,000
David Cameron opposed the expansion towns first put forward in 2007, and scrapped them when he came to office. 8 years later he eventually relented to build an extension to Ebbsfleet. He's fallen chronically behind in all house building targets and we are after all talking about a country that can't even decide about building a third runway on an airport. Does he really stand a cat in hells chance of building Bristol by the year 2025? And even if he did, what then. The next generation from an expanding population are on the move
The population of Africa is expected to be 1.9Bn by 2050. He'll have to build Birmingham now
This simply isn't sustainable
The only other option is to ask Nicola Sturgeon to take them as she's indicated that the Scots need asylum seekers. Not sure what she'll scoop mind you. I had the grissly misfortune to visit a place called Hillbrow a decade ago. It's an inner area of Jo'burg known locally as little Lagos. Now admittedly I had someone with me who was authorised to defend me using whatever was necessary, but there could be little doubt that if they weren't there I'd have lasted all of one minute. As he explained, these people will cut your finger off to get a ring. They feel they have to though, because if they don't attack you first, someone else will, and their opportunity will have been lost. Do we want this? urm .... no. When the South African police (those well known shrinking violets) won't go into an area, and hand it over instead to a commando unit backed up with private security shoot first folk you know you have a problem.
I agree that such migration flows don't seem sustainable. Your estimate for Africa might be on the high side, but on the other hand there's also Asia to consider. As you say, nobody knows the scale of the issue. In the longer run we have to hope that prosperity comes to the countries people are wanting to leave.
The immediate issue is a bit different, however. The UN says there are more refugees on the move now that at any time since WW2 and many of them are arriving in Europe in numbers that make it hard for the States concerned to cope. I think help is needed from the rest of the EU to provide humane treatment to people who are fleeing from war zones and are genuine refugees.
The immediate issue is a bit different, however. The UN says there are more refugees on the move now that at any time since WW2 and many of them are arriving in Europe in numbers that make it hard for the States concerned to cope. I think help is needed from the rest of the EU to provide humane treatment to people who are fleeing from war zones and are genuine refugees.
simmo
Senior Jockey
This article is rather similar to some of those I have seen recently.
http://gerryco23.files.wordpress.co...ountry-daily-mail-saturday-20-august-1938.jpg
http://gerryco23.files.wordpress.co...ountry-daily-mail-saturday-20-august-1938.jpg
Attachments
President of Ireland Michael D Higgins is strongly critical of the EU response to the migrant crisis and says in particular that "... we must acknowledge that the European response as a whole has been grossly inadequate with Italy, Spain, Malta and Greece left struggling to cope with large influxes of refugees and migrants”.
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/michael-d-higgins-eu-response-to-migrant-crisis-is-shameful-1.2310588
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/michael-d-higgins-eu-response-to-migrant-crisis-is-shameful-1.2310588
Last edited:
The fact that there isnt a unified response proves yet again that the eu is to all intents and purposes dead. Either way it should be elected administrations that take decisions here.
Todays pictures were awful. But which way to turn? It is a simple fact that more entries the more demand.
Also there is the simple bare fact explicitly stated by hungary that most do not want anymore muslim immigration. That is a fact and understandable. Tough again but a community reaps what it sows
Todays pictures were awful. But which way to turn? It is a simple fact that more entries the more demand.
Also there is the simple bare fact explicitly stated by hungary that most do not want anymore muslim immigration. That is a fact and understandable. Tough again but a community reaps what it sows
Personally I wish we could take more without the consequences of encouraging further migrants. We certainly can do so deapite what ukip and so on might say.
Just about all the papers carried the pic today including most vociferously the sun and mail, which is significant for Cameron. Given that Cameron is unlikely to have any credible opposition in parliament for the next four years, we have the situation whereby it's his own side from where pressure on certain issues will come. The guardian and New Islamist economic flat earth labour are completely irrelevant
Todays very sad picture may tip the balance. In many ways I hope so
Just about all the papers carried the pic today including most vociferously the sun and mail, which is significant for Cameron. Given that Cameron is unlikely to have any credible opposition in parliament for the next four years, we have the situation whereby it's his own side from where pressure on certain issues will come. The guardian and New Islamist economic flat earth labour are completely irrelevant
Todays very sad picture may tip the balance. In many ways I hope so
Last edited:
icebreaker
At the Start
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2005
- Messages
- 2,957
That's all very fine, Clive, but would you accept that there might be extra strain on services/infrastructure as a consequence?
As an outsider, I don't want to pontificate on the situation in the UK -- but f it is anything like the country I live in, the health service is already creaking under the pressure of increased demand, the housing shortage is already obvious with literally thousands of native indigenous citizens homeless. Can we cope with even more inflow?
Every extra migrant means a house less for the native born. (And it does seem --here anyway -- that someone who jumps off a plane from Lagos, Nigeria, gets a house in front of the locals who are on housing lists for years). We've done enough; we've fulfilled our obligations with migrants/fugees. Enough already. Th ordinary people of this country are still trying to deal with imposed austerity in their everyday lives, and I'll guarantee that most of them are a bit tee'ed off with requiring to support even more migrants with the limited resources available.
Re that pic on the front pages today. Have to say that I see it as a bit of grief porn by the media. Sort of tragedy-voyeurism with a motive of putting Europeans into a guilt-trip. Please don't anyone accuse me of being heartless. I'm not.
Last edited:
Desperate Dan
Senior Jockey
So we stand by and let them die? Personally, I or anybody I know, is unaware of anybody who`s stepped off a plane from Lagos then gets a house in front of locals. Urban myth, perhaps?
I have a modest proposal.
1. There are approximately 795 million people in the world who do not have enough food to eat everyday. (ref: World Hunger)
2. There are about 2 million people actively migrant. (ref: UN)
3. Each wannabee migrant weighs about 140Lbs. (ref: made it up)
4. This creates a potential food source of ~200 Million Lbs of meat at 70% utilisation of the migrants. (Source: Jimmy in my local butchers.)
5. This presents a food source of about .25 of a Lb of meat for all those hungry people, enough to keep them alive for another 2 days or so. (Which may be enough time to migrate north and replenish the beef mountain.)
Why has nobody thought of this before?
1. There are approximately 795 million people in the world who do not have enough food to eat everyday. (ref: World Hunger)
2. There are about 2 million people actively migrant. (ref: UN)
3. Each wannabee migrant weighs about 140Lbs. (ref: made it up)
4. This creates a potential food source of ~200 Million Lbs of meat at 70% utilisation of the migrants. (Source: Jimmy in my local butchers.)
5. This presents a food source of about .25 of a Lb of meat for all those hungry people, enough to keep them alive for another 2 days or so. (Which may be enough time to migrate north and replenish the beef mountain.)
Why has nobody thought of this before?
Last edited:
No, it happens, and it happens for two reasons
1: Most LA's will have some particularly decrepit stock categorised formally or informally as VITL's (virtually impossible to let) - the acronym probably changes between authorities but it amounts ot same thing - bloody awful housing in a shat area. Indigenous populations tend to reject these VITL's when they're offered to them. Asylum seekers don't. Hence the perception of they jumped over me in the queue
2: All LA's operate a points based system for allocating houses. People presenting as homeless score a lot more points than those who are safely housed. As a consequence they do leap up the register ahead of someone who merely wants to move from one location to another. If we haven't got enough stock (and we're woeful in the UK) someone who is single without any dependent children or medical condition, can effectively be trapped on the list with little prospect of advancing (unless they develop a medical condition or a few children). Again, this is how the perception grows
It certainly is not the EU's finest hour.
But what do you mean by "elected administrations"? Who is taking the decisions on this issue if not the individual Member States?
The EU gets damned by opponents when decisions get made which are not universally popular and it also gets damned when no decisions get made.
And what "community" are you referring to that is now reaping what it has sown?
icebreaker
At the Start
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2005
- Messages
- 2,957
I cannot understand this. Who are "We"? Europeans?
And how do we "let them die"? Seems to me that any deaths of migrants/refugees are of their own making -- travelling on train carriage rooftops out of Calais; taking to the sea in appallingly dilapidated boats etc etc. Those are acts of misadventure, and not things that can be blamed on Europe. Case in point, this little boy whose picture was on today's newspapers appears to have been travelling from Turkey on a deathtrap dinghy. From Turkey, which is a safe haven, not from some warzone. Why? Under any other circumstance his parents would be done for child endangerment. But now there seems to be a move to somehow blame it on Europe and "us". More emotional blackmail.
I said it should be the nation states and will remain so. But taht rules the eu out and whqt exactly is its role then?
the community Is Muslims. Eastern European States have explicitly said they would take Christians not Muslims. Like it or not they look at France say and think.. No thanks
much of Islam does not believe in integration and frankly populations don't want them. Right or wrong.. That's the way it is . Hungary is not going to get a Charlie hebo off sikhs Chinese or African Christians is it?
Last edited:
As far as the hand wringers go it's always "our fault" . all the above is unarguable
icebreaker
At the Start
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2005
- Messages
- 2,957
This is so very true.
And as well, there are strong hints from Hungary that the inevitable Islamification of Europe which will follow from unfettered immigration is a real fear among the countries of middle Europe. Particularly in Hungary, which in the 16th century was all that stood between the Ottoman invasion of Western Europe, and in which Hungary lost many thousands of it's menfolk at Mohacs. Such history is still very strong in the folk memory of the Hungarian people. It is quite understandable that Hungary has a real and valid fear of Islam and of Islam's natural tendency to overwhelm and impose it's belief system.
There is a real threat to the stability and the to the national identity of all European countries and to the European way-of-life if uncontrolled inflow of Muslim immigrants continues. Call me a Racist if you want, but I'm not.
Cameron's promise to take more immigrants is on the face of it laudable and in keeping with our long history of doing so: for better or worse something we should all be immensely proud of, and furthermore touched by the fact that our sceptered isle is still regarded as a land of cockaigne by hoards of foreigners
But isn't it reality that the UK is already over-populated - near 65 million - and our infrastructure is struggling to cope: NHS, schools, roads etc
We can't take any more...?
But isn't it reality that the UK is already over-populated - near 65 million - and our infrastructure is struggling to cope: NHS, schools, roads etc
We can't take any more...?
icebreaker
At the Start
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2005
- Messages
- 2,957
Looks like D Cameron has rounded on a number of 4,000 to accept into Britain. Andy Burnham wanted 25,000. And now Natalie Bennett of the Greens has suggested that 240,000 should be taken in by the U.K.
Seems to be a competition to be seen as the most "compassionate". It's a farce.
Meanwhile, it turns out that the five wealthiest Arab States -- Saudi, UAE, Qatar, Kuwait, Bahrain, -- have collectively failed to take in one single solitary refugee.
Quote: "Gulf nations argue that accepting large numbers of Syrian refugees is a serious threat to the safety of its citizens because terrorists could hide themselves among civilians."
Oh, that's okay so.
Seems to be a competition to be seen as the most "compassionate". It's a farce.
Meanwhile, it turns out that the five wealthiest Arab States -- Saudi, UAE, Qatar, Kuwait, Bahrain, -- have collectively failed to take in one single solitary refugee.
Quote: "Gulf nations argue that accepting large numbers of Syrian refugees is a serious threat to the safety of its citizens because terrorists could hide themselves among civilians."
Oh, that's okay so.