Could UK U-turn on Referendum Result (Vol 2)

[sidicks]

Elysium said:

I find it unbelievably sad that we have to be 'forced' to take in refugees from Syria. A country that has been virtually destroyed.

Why the quotes around 'refugees' .. do you think Syria is a safe place to live? If you were Syrian would you not try to get out for a better life?

Anyone born in the UK in the last 50 years has essentially won the lottery. We have the opportunity to live in peace, access to amazing healthcare, opportunities for social mobility and incredibly high living standards.

It's perfectly understandable that people would like some of those opportunities. I have no problem with that, provided that they contribute to society.

So you'd be in favour of constraining immigration only to those who can contribute / add value. Interesting...

[don4l]

Elysium said:

I find it unbelievably sad that we have to be 'forced' to take in refugees from Syria.

Who forced us?

[anonymous-user]

don4l said:

Elysium said:

I find it unbelievably sad that we have to be 'forced' to take in refugees from Syria.

Who forced us?

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/world/2015/sep/03/cameron-bows-to-pressure-to-allow-more-syrian-refugees-into-britain?client=safari

[SilverSixer]

768 said:

Elysium said:

I find it unbelievably sad that we have to be 'forced' to take in refugees from Syria. A country that has been virtually destroyed.

I find it unbelievably sad that there's nowhere suitable between Syria and the UK.

I find it unbelievably sad that you seemingly don't want to accept that the vast majority of Syrian refugees have been taken by countries between Syria and the UK, particularly neighbouring countries in the Middle East such as Jordan and Lebanon and Turkey.

How on Earth can you possibly believe that Syrians have not been taken in anywhere but the UK? I'm certain you believe Merkel's invite to refugees to go to Germany was ill-thought out and has had poor consequences for Germany, so how can you believe simultaneously that no refugees have found shelter anywhere between the UK and Syria, but that too many have been taken by Germany?

Do you genuinely think about things or just spout whatever it is that you want to believe? The UK has barely taken any Syrian refugees, and that fact is an absolute disgrace to our great country.

[Mrr T]

bmw535i said:

This country was basically forced by the EU to take "refugees" (some were "children") from both Syria and Calais. We do not have full control over our non EU immigration policy.

This statement is totally incorrect.

The EU wanted the UK to take refugees from the rest of the rUK. The UK refused and only took them from Syria directly. This was a decision by the UK government under pressure from some hand wringers.

The UK took unaccompanied children (sic) from the Calais camp in an agreement between the French and UK governments.

[768]

SilverSixer said:

768 said:

Elysium said:

I find it unbelievably sad that we have to be 'forced' to take in refugees from Syria. A country that has been virtually destroyed.

I find it unbelievably sad that there's nowhere suitable between Syria and the UK.

I find it unbelievably sad that you seemingly don't want to accept that the vast majority of Syrian refugees have been taken by countries between Syria and the UK, particularly neighbouring countries in the Middle East such as Jordan and Lebanon and Turkey.

How on Earth can you possibly believe that Syrians have not been taken in anywhere but the UK? I'm certain you believe Merkel's invite to refugees to go to Germany was ill-thought out and has had poor consequences for Germany, so how can you believe simultaneously that no refugees have found shelter anywhere between the UK and Syria, but that too many have been taken by Germany?

Do you genuinely think about things or just spout whatever it is that you want to believe? The UK has barely taken any Syrian refugees, and that fact is an absolute disgrace to our great country.

I haven't said none have been taken in between Syria and the UK.

Do you genuinely read things or just spout whatever it is that you want to believe?

[SilverSixer]

768 said:

SilverSixer said:

768 said:

Elysium said:

I find it unbelievably sad that we have to be 'forced' to take in refugees from Syria. A country that has been virtually destroyed.

I find it unbelievably sad that there's nowhere suitable between Syria and the UK.

I find it unbelievably sad that you seemingly don't want to accept that the vast majority of Syrian refugees have been taken by countries between Syria and the UK, particularly neighbouring countries in the Middle East such as Jordan and Lebanon and Turkey.

How on Earth can you possibly believe that Syrians have not been taken in anywhere but the UK? I'm certain you believe Merkel's invite to refugees to go to Germany was ill-thought out and has had poor consequences for Germany, so how can you believe simultaneously that no refugees have found shelter anywhere between the UK and Syria, but that too many have been taken by Germany?

Do you genuinely think about things or just spout whatever it is that you want to believe? The UK has barely taken any Syrian refugees, and that fact is an absolute disgrace to our great country.

I haven't said none have been taken in between Syria and the UK.

Do you genuinely read things or just spout whatever it is that you want to believe?

"I find it unbelievably sad that there's nowhere suitable between Syria and the UK."

[FiF]

bmw535i said:

///ajd knows nothing about immigration policy. I do - I spend a lot of time negotiating with the HO to get non EU citizens into the country - it's incredibly difficult sometimes. It's even more difficult to remove them once they're here -this applies to both EU and non EU.r

Apologies for the selective quote.

I've written on here before of the difficulties and extensive time consuming administration involved with this. It is incredibly difficult sometimes, and it ends up at times with people who would actually be a benefit to society being refused simply because of some small wrinkle or unanswered question that might cause a difficulty down the line, all because non EU immigration is so tightly screwed down because that from the EU has been allowed to proceed without any effective control. There's also the case where, for example, someone puts in a thesis and at their viva voce receive a pass from the examiners with some modifications required, which can require 3-6 months of extra work, sometimes a year. Enormous problems to extend their visa and uncertainties all round. Now people might regard these as insignificant issues, speaking of small wrinkles or getting a visa extension, too many wrinkles / refusals from HO and you lose your sponsor status, thus the ability to bring in people who are paying to study here, bringing in money to the nation and adding to our society and talent pool.

Yet despite enormous efforts that are put in we get the tiresome broad brush oblique slimy sneers about Leavers being Leavers because they're just a bit racist, and when the repeat perpetrators are called out on this they try to hide behind semantics with protestations that they didn't exactly write that, despite the clear implications being made.

[768]

SilverSixer said:

768 said:

I haven't said none have been taken in between Syria and the UK.

"I find it unbelievably sad that there's nowhere suitable between Syria and the UK."

Err... yeah. I can't say it slower for you?

[B'stard Child]

FiF said:

bmw535i said:

///ajd knows nothing about immigration policy. I do - I spend a lot of time negotiating with the HO to get non EU citizens into the country - it's incredibly difficult sometimes. It's even more difficult to remove them once they're here -this applies to both EU and non EU.r

Apologies for the selective quote.

I've written on here before of the difficulties and extensive time consuming administration involved with this. It is incredibly difficult sometimes, and it ends up at times with people who would actually be a benefit to society being refused simply because of some small wrinkle or unanswered question that might cause a difficulty down the line, all because non EU immigration is so tightly screwed down because that from the EU has been allowed to proceed without any effective control. There's also the case where, for example, someone puts in a thesis and at their viva voce receive a pass from the examiners with some modifications required, which can require 3-6 months of extra work, sometimes a year. Enormous problems to extend their visa and uncertainties all round. Now people might regard these as insignificant issues, speaking of small wrinkles or getting a visa extension, too many wrinkles / refusals from HO and you lose your sponsor status, thus the ability to bring in people who are paying to study here, bringing in money to the nation and adding to our society and talent pool.

Yet despite enormous efforts that are put in we get the tiresome broad brush oblique slimy sneers about Leavers being Leavers because they're just a bit racist, and when the repeat perpetrators are called out on this they try to hide behind semantics with protestations that they didn't exactly write that, despite the clear implications being made.

Bingo - nailed it

[SilverSixer]

768 said:

SilverSixer said:

768 said:

I haven't said none have been taken in between Syria and the UK.

"I find it unbelievably sad that there's nowhere suitable between Syria and the UK."

Err... yeah. I can't say it slower for you?

The implication of your glib comment being that all refugees end up in the UK, or trying to get in the UK, when it is in fact a small minority who make up either group. If that's not what your comment is implying, then you're going to have to expand on your comment rather than repeat it more slowly.

There are, quite self-evidently, many suitable places between Syria and the UK, as clearly demonstrated by the fact that the huge majority of refugees have headed for and settled in and been supported by countries other than the UK.

So, I don't think it's unfair to ask you to explain what you meant by your comment, when, at face value, it is demonstrably untrue.

Feel free not to answer of course, the UKIP Patriot Police hasn't been set up yet so nobody can force you to speak.

[768]

If a refugee makes it from Syria to the UK it seems there was nowhere in between suitable for them.

Nothing about that means someone else didn't find somewhere adequately safe along what is a 4000+ mile journey.

[anonymous-user]

Mrr T said:

bmw535i said:

This country was basically forced by the EU to take "refugees" (some were "children") from both Syria and Calais. We do not have full control over our non EU immigration policy.

This statement is totally incorrect.

The EU wanted the UK to take refugees from the rest of the rUK. The UK refused and only took them from Syria directly. This was a decision by the UK government under pressure from some hand wringers.

The UK took unaccompanied children (sic) from the Calais camp in an agreement between the French and UK governments.

You seem to have pretty much confirmed what I said. Thank you

[anonymous-user]

FiF said:

bmw535i said:

///ajd knows nothing about immigration policy. I do - I spend a lot of time negotiating with the HO to get non EU citizens into the country - it's incredibly difficult sometimes. It's even more difficult to remove them once they're here -this applies to both EU and non EU.r

Apologies for the selective quote.

I've written on here before of the difficulties and extensive time consuming administration involved with this. It is incredibly difficult sometimes, and it ends up at times with people who would actually be a benefit to society being refused simply because of some small wrinkle or unanswered question that might cause a difficulty down the line, all because non EU immigration is so tightly screwed down because that from the EU has been allowed to proceed without any effective control. There's also the case where, for example, someone puts in a thesis and at their viva voce receive a pass from the examiners with some modifications required, which can require 3-6 months of extra work, sometimes a year. Enormous problems to extend their visa and uncertainties all round. Now people might regard these as insignificant issues, speaking of small wrinkles or getting a visa extension, too many wrinkles / refusals from HO and you lose your sponsor status, thus the ability to bring in people who are paying to study here, bringing in money to the nation and adding to our society and talent pool.

Yet despite enormous efforts that are put in we get the tiresome broad brush oblique slimy sneers about Leavers being Leavers because they're just a bit racist, and when the repeat perpetrators are called out on this they try to hide behind semantics with protestations that they didn't exactly write that, despite the clear implications being made.

I have recently seen an application for a visitors visa being refused because the birth certificate submitted was clearly a copy after the original was lost. The copy was obviously dated recently and so the HO wanted to know why the birth hadn't been registered for 30+ years. There is no right to appeal these decisions short of going for judicial review - most simply cannot afford this and simply have to resubmit at a cost of a couple of hundred quid each time.

On the other hand I've seen people on 4 year visas commit fraud, get imprisoned, then attempted deportation. A last minute appeal and they are allowed to remain whilst not being able to work and claim benefits, but still have access to the NHS and then go on to commit further crime.

If EU migration was controlled, there would not be such draconian rules for non EU migrants. The system is ludicrous.

[jjlynn27]

jjlynn27 said:

sidicks said:

jjlynn27 said:

sidicks said:

You have repeatedly suggested / implied that anyone who voted leave, in part due to perfectly legitimate claims about immigration, is a racist.

Edited by sidicks on Tuesday 29th November 18:04

Since it was repeatedly, any example to link, shouldn't be too taxing.

Feel free to re-read the 140+ pages of this thread and the 400+ pages of the other Brexit thread for numerous examples.

You made a claim, you said that it was repeatedly, I asked for the link, you provided none.

Anything at all?

[Mrr T]

bmw535i said:

Mrr T said:

bmw535i said:

This country was basically forced by the EU to take "refugees" (some were "children") from both Syria and Calais. We do not have full control over our non EU immigration policy.

This statement is totally incorrect.

The EU wanted the UK to take refugees from the rest of the rUK. The UK refused and only took them from Syria directly. This was a decision by the UK government under pressure from some hand wringers.

The UK took unaccompanied children (sic) from the Calais camp in an agreement between the French and UK governments.

You seem to have pretty much confirmed what I said. Thank you

WTF!!!!!!!!!!!

Both these decisions were made by the UK government. So by definition the UK government has total control over non EU immigration.

Only if by “we” you mean the PH posters would my post have confirmed your comment.

[SilverSixer]

768 said:

If a refugee makes it from Syria to the UK it seems there was nowhere in between suitable for them.

Nothing about that means someone else didn't find somewhere adequately safe along what is a 4000+ mile journey.

I see. The one who made it to the UK is being wilful. So the UK shouldn't take a share. Or any.

OK.

[anonymous-user]

Mrr T said:

bmw535i said:

Mrr T said:

bmw535i said:

This country was basically forced by the EU to take "refugees" (some were "children") from both Syria and Calais. We do not have full control over our non EU immigration policy.

This statement is totally incorrect.

The EU wanted the UK to take refugees from the rest of the rUK. The UK refused and only took them from Syria directly. This was a decision by the UK government under pressure from some hand wringers.

The UK took unaccompanied children (sic) from the Calais camp in an agreement between the French and UK governments.

You seem to have pretty much confirmed what I said. Thank you

WTF!!!!!!!!!!!

Both these decisions were made by the UK government. So by definition the UK government has total control over non EU immigration.

Only if by “we” you mean the PH posters would my post have confirmed your comment.

I don't think you have much understanding of how this decision by the UK government was reached. You agree that they were under pressure to receive immigrants from Syria, which is all I have said. In essence you agree with me, so I'm not sure what the issue is.

Our non EU immigration policies have been changed as a result of EU immigration and EU influence.

[B'stard Child]

bmw535i said:

Our non EU immigration policies have been changed as a result of EU immigration and EU influence.

I raised that specific issue (with a good example of how wrong it was) as one of my 273 reason to vote leave pre "independance day" - it wasn't discussed and many of the same people here still won't discuss it properly...

[768]

SilverSixer said:

768 said:

If a refugee makes it from Syria to the UK it seems there was nowhere in between suitable for them.

Nothing about that means someone else didn't find somewhere adequately safe along what is a 4000+ mile journey.

I see. The one who made it to the UK is being wilful. So the UK shouldn't take a share. Or any.

OK.

Jesus, another strawman?

I'll leave you to it Worzel. Happy trolling.