happyhippy Posted June 10, 2009 Share Posted June 10, 2009 , Dont have problem with people who come and contribute to our system, I work with many who do and value their contribution greatly. Indeed, however the BNP do. Yes no one can argue that this type of experience can not be fully appreciated and must cause the person immense psychological harm, and I for one don't dispute that they duly deserve our protection and help, but why do many of these individuals pass through so many safe countries, their primary aim to reach the UK. How many individuals are sat right now at Calais with similiar stories are they not now in a safe country, the difference being is they would not recieve the same ammount of financial benefits, they would be given a safe place to stay, (hostel, or designated centre) adequate food and clothing, not to mention access to health and psychological assistance. Bearing in mind that they're in a Francophone country, where many from Congo (as an example), say, have also travelled to, they're not necessarily safe. If the UK were the primary destination for asylum seekers in the EU, then why does Germany hold more? I know from fact having lived in Australia, Spain, Germany, Gibraltar that I wouldn't be entitled to any financial benefits from that country. This was reinforced whilst I was in Spain, I was injured and off work for quite sometime and not earning, when my finances ran out I enquired about financial assistance and was laughed out of their benefits office, further enquiries directed me to the embassy to seek emergency assistance to send me back home, thankfully although it was many years back I had family who bailed me out. In Australia I would have been deported immediatly if I was not working. I can assure you that given the reciprocal arrangements we have with the EU and other countries, that wouldn't happen now. I agree, however does that go for someone guilty of rape/assault, murder, peodophilia, enticing others to cause harm in the name of their religion, preaching hate for the country they hate so much and for those that remain silent when they know these acts are about to take place. I can think of many families in the UK who may wish that certain individuals had been deported, maybe then their loved ones would still be here today or those who suffer on a daily basis the psychological effects of their actions. My thoughts are that if you commit a crime in a nation state, it's up to that nation state to decide on the sentence, according to its own laws. Just as we detain criminals we convict but will deport. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MR BENN Posted June 10, 2009 Share Posted June 10, 2009 this is a point ive made many times on various threads . why is it that asylum seekers travel through many safe countrys ,where they would be safe from harm and violence to get to Britain ? surely the first safe haven they arrived in would serve the purpose ? why ignore all of these countrys and head for Britain ? anything to do with the fact that we are known as a soft touch ? still waiting for someone to answer this question -but wont hold my breath Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IanG Posted June 10, 2009 Share Posted June 10, 2009 How are we overcrowded, when the entire population of the Earth could fit comfortably on the Isle of Wight? .....that makes about as much sense as an average post on sheffield forum. ie **** all!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
happyhippy Posted June 10, 2009 Share Posted June 10, 2009 still waiting for someone to answer this question -but wont hold my breath I have done repeatedly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eddie40 Posted June 10, 2009 Share Posted June 10, 2009 Indeed, however the BNP do. I vote Labour but I don't agree with all their policies Bearing in mind that they're in a Francophone country, where many from Congo (as an example), say, have also travelled to, they're not necessarily safe. If the UK were the primary destination for asylum seekers in the EU, then why does Germany hold more?. Can not dissagree that Germany holds more asylum seekers United Nation Migration statistics give support, however as you know once a person has been identified by a country within Europe as being an asylum seeker they are then prevented from travelling and seeking asylum in any other EU country, as a variety of documentries have shown many of those in Germany as well as other countries weren't entirely happy at being given assylum in that country, their main aim was to reach the UK. Germany also has an excellent record in repatriation a system in which the UK could learn a lot from. There's no lengthy appeal system, asylum seekers are housed in open hostels and given food vouchers, there is also a concerted effort by employers and the Govt in not employing asylum seekers, the penalties are far worse than in the UK. And why then are France allowing asylum seekers to set up camps whilst they attempt to reach the UK. Shouldn't the French border control be their on mass and processing them, rather than turning a blind eye. I can assure you that given the reciprocal arrangements we have with the EU and other countries, that wouldn't happen now. Yes we do have reciprocal arrangements however you only recieve bare minimum financial assistance, assistance that puts food on your table, you do not get housing your placed in a hostel, financial assistance to furnish your home with a wide varity of goods such as TV's/satalite systems, Washer dryers, cars etc, and lets not forget resettlement cash to spend on whatever you like. As for Australia I have only recent left and I can assure you that unless I hold permanent citizenship I would be deported. However I would have been held at a detention centre far out in the outback. My thoughts are that if you commit a crime in a nation state, it's up to that nation state to decide on the sentence, according to its own laws. Just as we detain criminals we convict but will deport. Our record is somwhat poor to say the least here are a few of many, many examples, Roberto Malasi, an 18-year-old Angolan asylum seeker crime: at christening party shot dead a 33-year-old woman as she cradled her baby niece, before robbing guests. His three Nigerian accomplices all had past convictions. two weeks later Malasi stabbed to death an 18-year-old pastor's daughter who he felt had "disrespected" him. Yusuf Jama, a Somali asylum-seeker, was in the gang that shot dead Pc Sharon Beshenivsky in Bradford in 2005; Michal Pech, a Slovak army deserter, who shot dead his former lover, Clare Bernal, at Harvey Nichols department store in London in 2005, before shooting himself; David Bieber, an American bouncer wanted for murder in his homeland, who shot dead Pc Ian Broadhurst in Leeds in 2003; What do all these have in common they were all illegally in this country, and all had prior convictions, some were sentenced to deportation orders but during their appeals fled. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dexkdes Posted June 10, 2009 Share Posted June 10, 2009 (edited) On current demographic trends, we, the native British people, will be an ethnic minority in our own country within sixty years. To ensure that this does not happen, and that the British people retain their homeland and identity, we call for an immediate halt to all further immigration, the immediate deportation of criminal and illegal immigrants, and the introduction of a system of voluntary resettlement whereby those immigrants who are legally here will be afforded the opportunity to return to their lands of ethnic origin assisted by a generous financial incentives both for individuals and for the countries in question. We will abolish the ‘positive discrimination’ schemes that have made white Britons second-class citizens. We will also clamp down on the flood of ‘asylum seekers’, all of whom are either bogus or can find refuge much nearer their home countries. Reading this, I wonder how the BNP could actually enforce it. Firstly, an end to ALL immigration would be absolutely devastating to Britain, as there are a good number of very useful immigrants coming here and filling gaps in services, etc. Secondly, an immediate deportation of illegal and criminal immigrants? Doesn't that require the cooperation of the recipient Nation too? Finally, they don't specify who they class as Immigrants. As they have said on numerous occasions that black people (amongst other colours) "can't be british," would it be safe to assume that I (a third Generation Briton) would also be considered an immigrant? They also fail to specify timescales of eligibility. How far back would they go? Could they seriously afford to offer every legal immigrant finance to leave Britain? My grandparents have been here nearly 60 years. It's not specific, it's not well written or considered, it's a terrible policy. Edited June 10, 2009 by Dexkdes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Sidney Posted June 10, 2009 Share Posted June 10, 2009 What a stupid reply. It's a pity that you don't have to face those 2 million and tell them to their faces that they're sat on their fat lazy arses. Anyway when they put this argument it seems to imply that all the people on jobseekers are white. This is far from true a disproportionate amount of them are ethnic minorities anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stc88 Posted June 10, 2009 Share Posted June 10, 2009 still waiting for someone to answer this question -but wont hold my breath when migrants leave their homeland they head straight for the UK, some do try to settle in italy but the italians are very hostile and have seen at first hand the treatment they recieve from gangs of italian youths...stabbings and beatings on a nightly basis....france and germany also dislike the migrants....so if you were trying to make a new life where would you head for...the answer is the UK... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyfriday Posted June 10, 2009 Share Posted June 10, 2009 Secondly, an immediate deportation of illegal and criminal immigrants? Doesn't that require the cooperation of the recipient Nation too? Finally, they don't specify who they class as Immigrants. As they have said on numerous occasions that black people (amongst other colours) "can't be british," would it be safe to assume that I (a third Generation Briton) would also be considered an immigrant? They also fail to specify timescales of eligibility. How far back would they go? Could they seriously afford to offer every legal immigrant finance to leave Britain? My grandparents have been here nearly 60 years. It's not specific, it's not well written or considered, it's a terrible policy. I've some bad news for you Dexkdes, their interest is not confined to 'immigrants', criminal, illlegal or otherwise, if non white people don't leave voluntarily they'll implement legal changes to enforce it-that's straight from their constitution. So whether you've been here 60 years, or a non white doctor that's been here 1 year, you will be 'repatriated'. It would also apply to the children of mixed race relationships and they'd probably want to go back even further than that, if there was any visible 'non-whiteness' in them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyfriday Posted June 10, 2009 Share Posted June 10, 2009 still waiting for someone to answer this question -but wont hold my breath Apologises if you've replied already and I've missed it, but it appears you're not so good at answering questions yourself, this was 2 days ago: By the way, did you see my earlier post in response to yours regarding your 'coloured friends' Mr Benn? Like the BNP and most of their supporters you're leaving people with the impression that you dont wish to exercise your right to free speech when asked reasonable questions. You'll recall you were celebrating your friendship with some non white people, which being a BNP supporter appears incongruous, as the BNP dont permit such friendships. I'm guessing your 'coloured friends' will also disapprove of you voting for a party that would have them and their children kicked out of this country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts