| Another day in the channel… 14:08 - Oct 5 with 1796 views | Joesus_Of_Narbereth |
I can’t believe what I’m reading here. Please tell me that I’ve got it wrong. It appears a young four year old child has been trampled to death on a migrant boat in the channel, three others killed. The dead have been airlifted out of the boat following a distress call and the others are then left to “carry on their journey”?
Carry on their journey? Anywhere else in the civilised world where you find four dead bodies it would be locked down as a potential crime scene. All witnesses would be held and a full investigation would be carried out with criminal proceedings following.
Just carry on sailing lads, we’ll take it from here. Your journey is far more important than those four corpses. Safe trip.
Absolute madness.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cj041vl4j4lo
|  |
| |  |
| Another day in the channel… on 14:26 - Oct 5 with 1556 views | union_jack |
Says everything about the French attitude to the boats, if they’re heading north, don’t stop them! |  |
| |
| Another day in the channel… on 14:35 - Oct 5 with 1543 views | Joesus_Of_Narbereth |
| Another day in the channel… on 14:26 - Oct 5 by union_jack |
Says everything about the French attitude to the boats, if they’re heading north, don’t stop them! |
It’s like we’re all living in some virtual real life Brass Eye episode. | |
| |
| Another day in the channel… on 16:08 - Oct 5 with 1509 views | AnotherJohn |
Hard to add anything really - surreal events dressed up in a bizarre version of morality that says boats cannot be turned back because it puts lives at risk. We've seen over and over that it is allowing boats to proceed that results in deaths. And when this boat arrives on our shores will the occupants be held in custody and questioned? My guess is brief interviews and then an hotel. |  | | |
| Another day in the channel… on 19:25 - Oct 5 with 1417 views | JACKMANANDBOY |
| Another day in the channel… on 14:35 - Oct 5 by Joesus_Of_Narbereth |
It’s like we’re all living in some virtual real life Brass Eye episode. |
I am not sure what the word for this debacle is. The stretch of water involved is very small and so should be easy to police. We have spent many billions playing around at the edges.This is a stand off between us and the French. |  |
| |
| Another day in the channel… on 19:54 - Oct 5 with 1401 views | Dr_Winston |
| Another day in the channel… on 19:25 - Oct 5 by JACKMANANDBOY |
I am not sure what the word for this debacle is. The stretch of water involved is very small and so should be easy to police. We have spent many billions playing around at the edges.This is a stand off between us and the French. |
As far as I can tell, anyone arriving in the UK without documents is immediately committing a criminal offence, so you'd think that any and all asylum applications would be rejected on those grounds alone.
The solution to the problem seems quite obvious and straightforward, but the political will to do so is conspicuous by its absence. Even more so with the current administration. |  |
| Pain or damage don't end the world. Or despair, or f*cking beatings. The world ends when you're dead. Until then, you got more punishment in store. Stand it like a man... and give some back. |
| |
| Another day in the channel… on 21:16 - Oct 5 with 1375 views | SullutaCreturned |
| Another day in the channel… on 16:08 - Oct 5 by AnotherJohn |
Hard to add anything really - surreal events dressed up in a bizarre version of morality that says boats cannot be turned back because it puts lives at risk. We've seen over and over that it is allowing boats to proceed that results in deaths. And when this boat arrives on our shores will the occupants be held in custody and questioned? My guess is brief interviews and then an hotel. |
You're right, people will continue to die. Racists will use the boats as a reason to spread hate and the politicians will continue to do nothing.
You have to wonder why? | | | |
| Another day in the channel… on 22:13 - Oct 5 with 1350 views | controversial_jack |
| Another day in the channel… on 19:54 - Oct 5 by Dr_Winston |
As far as I can tell, anyone arriving in the UK without documents is immediately committing a criminal offence, so you'd think that any and all asylum applications would be rejected on those grounds alone.
The solution to the problem seems quite obvious and straightforward, but the political will to do so is conspicuous by its absence. Even more so with the current administration. |
Then you would be wrong. It's not a criminal offence. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Another day in the channel… on 22:29 - Oct 5 with 1326 views | Dr_Winston |
Yes he is. As per.
Mass immigration into the UK is a political choice. The previous Govt lacked the cojones to deal with it properly, the current one actively encourages it.
The overwhelming majority of people arriving in the UK should be denied refugee status as a matter of course. At some point they will have to be. [Post edited 5 Oct 22:29]
| |
| Pain or damage don't end the world. Or despair, or f*cking beatings. The world ends when you're dead. Until then, you got more punishment in store. Stand it like a man... and give some back. |
| |
| Another day in the channel… on 22:31 - Oct 5 with 1313 views | KeithHaynes |
The toddler who died was born in Germany.
They could have traveled easily into the uk with a sponsor or other adult.
The issue here is the illegal Somali mother who decided that wasn’t a good idea so she led this youngster to their death because she was illegal.
Disgusting maggot. |  |
| |
| Another day in the channel… on 23:48 - Oct 5 with 1270 views | controversial_jack |
It's not unlawful to cross the channel and present yourself at immigration if you wish to enter. Whether it's allowed is another matter.
You could take a boat, cross the channel and have a day on a French beach if you like. Who would know where you came from | | | |
| Another day in the channel… on 00:34 - Oct 6 with 1258 views | Robbie |
My vote in the last General Election was in part based on who can control the small boats .
Last lot were a failed talking shop of promises and solutions to the problem , all a waste of time and money , Rwanda , that barge with legionnaires disease and throwing cash at the French to make an effort to stop the crossings , are they trying I sometimes wonder .
This new lot talked tough on their new bright ideas , think they appointed another nobody with a background in waffle as head of our Border Control , his new ideas are working well .
Question will be why try to get to the UK , first safe and Country refugees get to should be their safe haven and try to settle there , that I thought was the accepted ruling .
Most of Europe is being swamped by mass immigration , their Goverments will move them on as the law allows , France included .
Sadly in the face of conflict and toubles , there are many winners rubbing their hands at the incoming cash in hand , sod the rules and innocents involved then losing their lives . | | | |
| Another day in the channel… on 10:33 - Oct 6 with 1129 views | Joesus_Of_Narbereth |
| Another day in the channel… on 23:48 - Oct 5 by controversial_jack |
It's not unlawful to cross the channel and present yourself at immigration if you wish to enter. Whether it's allowed is another matter.
You could take a boat, cross the channel and have a day on a French beach if you like. Who would know where you came from |
It is of course illegal to employ the services of people traffickers to smuggle you across international borders. Every single person who comes by this route has committed criminal acts. | |
| |
| Another day in the channel… on 10:45 - Oct 6 with 1101 views | Joesus_Of_Narbereth |
| Another day in the channel… on 00:34 - Oct 6 by Robbie |
My vote in the last General Election was in part based on who can control the small boats .
Last lot were a failed talking shop of promises and solutions to the problem , all a waste of time and money , Rwanda , that barge with legionnaires disease and throwing cash at the French to make an effort to stop the crossings , are they trying I sometimes wonder .
This new lot talked tough on their new bright ideas , think they appointed another nobody with a background in waffle as head of our Border Control , his new ideas are working well .
Question will be why try to get to the UK , first safe and Country refugees get to should be their safe haven and try to settle there , that I thought was the accepted ruling .
Most of Europe is being swamped by mass immigration , their Goverments will move them on as the law allows , France included .
Sadly in the face of conflict and toubles , there are many winners rubbing their hands at the incoming cash in hand , sod the rules and innocents involved then losing their lives . |
Truth is they want as many people coming here as possible. Growing the population is the quickest and easiest way of growing the economy. Wages will be driven into the ground due to an abundance of unskilled people keeping the businesses happy.
There have been many articles over the last few years from the Washington post, Financial Times etc that argue that western countries will be actively competing for third world migrants in the next few years. I think that’s already started and we are winning. | |
| |
| Another day in the channel… on 11:24 - Oct 6 with 900 views | onehunglow |
| Another day in the channel… on 10:45 - Oct 6 by Joesus_Of_Narbereth |
Truth is they want as many people coming here as possible. Growing the population is the quickest and easiest way of growing the economy. Wages will be driven into the ground due to an abundance of unskilled people keeping the businesses happy.
There have been many articles over the last few years from the Washington post, Financial Times etc that argue that western countries will be actively competing for third world migrants in the next few years. I think that’s already started and we are winning. |
Youd have thought a “ working class party” would be all about saving the wages of its voters .
The first to lose jobs are those at the bottom of the wage ladder | |
| |
| Another day in the channel… on 12:01 - Oct 6 with 865 views | AnotherJohn |
A more precise way to put this is that such entries are illegal, but states that are signatories to the 1951 UN Refugee Convention will not impose penalties providing that certain conditions are met. This is the relevant part of Article 31.
1. The Contracting States shall not impose penalties, on
account of their illegal entry or presence, on refugees
who, coming directly from a territory where their life or
freedom was threatened in the sense of Article 1, enter or
are present in their territory without authorization,
provided they present themselves without delay to the
authorities and show good cause for their illegal entry or
presence.
As I have mentioned before on here, progressive lawyers have managed to water down the bit to do with "coming directly" (i.e. the need to register in first safe country). However, it seems to me that the "illegal entry or presence" bit still stands, or otherwise the Convention would have to be rewritten to retain a provision that allows asylum seekers to escape the imposition of a penalty. [Post edited 6 Oct 12:02]
| | | |
| Another day in the channel… on 13:38 - Oct 6 with 790 views | Joesus_Of_Narbereth |
That “fact checking” article does not fact check whether paying for the services of international human traffickers is legal or not. | |
| |
| Another day in the channel… on 13:42 - Oct 6 with 788 views | Joesus_Of_Narbereth |
| Another day in the channel… on 12:01 - Oct 6 by AnotherJohn |
A more precise way to put this is that such entries are illegal, but states that are signatories to the 1951 UN Refugee Convention will not impose penalties providing that certain conditions are met. This is the relevant part of Article 31.
1. The Contracting States shall not impose penalties, on
account of their illegal entry or presence, on refugees
who, coming directly from a territory where their life or
freedom was threatened in the sense of Article 1, enter or
are present in their territory without authorization,
provided they present themselves without delay to the
authorities and show good cause for their illegal entry or
presence.
As I have mentioned before on here, progressive lawyers have managed to water down the bit to do with "coming directly" (i.e. the need to register in first safe country). However, it seems to me that the "illegal entry or presence" bit still stands, or otherwise the Convention would have to be rewritten to retain a provision that allows asylum seekers to escape the imposition of a penalty. [Post edited 6 Oct 12:02]
|
The world has changed beyond recognition in the three quarters of a century since 1951. Perhaps we need to look at the principles again and what the definition of a refugee is in the modern world. | |
| |
| Another day in the channel… on 13:47 - Oct 6 with 782 views | Joesus_Of_Narbereth |
The other argument of course that they trot out is we need to import millions of young people because we have an aging population which makes perfect sense in the short term but these young people we are importing will also inevitably age making the problem exponentially worse in a few decades time.
We have and have had such myopic governments and politicians over the last few decades. Everything, absolutely everything is driven by money and the economy figures. And we’re all a lot worse off as a result. | |
| |
| Another day in the channel… on 13:51 - Oct 6 with 774 views | controversial_jack |
| Another day in the channel… on 13:38 - Oct 6 by Joesus_Of_Narbereth |
That “fact checking” article does not fact check whether paying for the services of international human traffickers is legal or not. |
Certainly human traffickers are illegal. Paying them though, i don't know if it's illegal, i would guess not If it was, then they would be charged and they aren't | | | |
| Another day in the channel… on 13:51 - Oct 6 with 774 views | SullutaCreturned |
| Another day in the channel… on 23:48 - Oct 5 by controversial_jack |
It's not unlawful to cross the channel and present yourself at immigration if you wish to enter. Whether it's allowed is another matter.
You could take a boat, cross the channel and have a day on a French beach if you like. Who would know where you came from |
What is being discussed here is not that though, and you know it.
Paying people traffickers to get you on a boat with the intention of avoiding the authorities when you arrive here IS illegal.
You can try travelling that way to France for a day on the beach but if the French police should find you, I'm not sure they'd believe you because not going via approved entry routes is frowned upon. You'd find yourself in a cell and waiting to be deported at the very least. | | | |
| Another day in the channel… on 13:57 - Oct 6 with 756 views | Joesus_Of_Narbereth |
| Another day in the channel… on 13:51 - Oct 6 by controversial_jack |
Certainly human traffickers are illegal. Paying them though, i don't know if it's illegal, i would guess not If it was, then they would be charged and they aren't |
Of course it’s illegal. Try hiring a hitman to kill someone you don’t like then argue in court “I only paid him guv!” | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
