UK asylum seekers expected to be flown to Rwanda

[s1962a]

272BHP said:

Mrr T said:

272BHP said:

Mrr T said:

So tell me about all your experience dealing with such situations how would have fought off the smugglers and stopped the launch.

Stop this nonsense.

5 people including one child died on that boat.

I agree stop your nonsense. The story was clear the French police tried to stop the launch but where unable to do so because of having to struggle with the smugglers. The boat was launched and then sank. Tragically people died. However, you insist it's the fault of the French police.

Yes.

The French need to listen to us right? I mean, we are the important ones in this relationship.

[272BHP]

Mrr T said:

You do understand the difference between a football stadium policed by riot police and a sandy beach where you are having to fight with the smugglers to get to a boat, and once its in the water you have to be very careful or you could get people tossed into the water.

People did get tossed into the water and they died precisely because 15 officers could not be bothered to do their job.

[valiant]

Unreal said:

I find it hard to believe anyone really believes it will.

If however, you had no documents on arrival and were coached up to Brize Norton and in Rwanda a few hours later, I think that it might.

Bearing in mind there’s approx 40000 migrants ahead of you and similar for previous years, I think you’ll be waiting in Brize Norton’s departure lounge for an awfully long time.

[Rivenink]

"It would take more than three years to remove them all, even if the Home Office hits a high of 15,000 forced deportations a year, which was last seen in 2012.

That number collapsed after departmental cuts and Brexit - although it has now reached 5,000 a year again."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-68841417

Tories caused the problem.

Why didn't they keep processing asylum claims from 2012 onwards, and deporting those who did not have a geniune claim?

How much money have they cost the British Taxpayer with their idealogical nonsense?

[Rufus Stone]

Mr Penguin said:

They are in a safe country (France) before boarding the dinghies to cross the Channel. Could it be that some of this migration is about more than just finding a safe haven?

And they were almost certainly in a safe country before arriving in France. But that doesn't change my comment.

[Rufus Stone]

272BHP said:

People did get tossed into the water and they died precisely because 15 officers could not be bothered to do their job.

Are you subbing for Stewie today or something?

[Mrr T]

272BHP said:

Mrr T said:

You do understand the difference between a football stadium policed by riot police and a sandy beach where you are having to fight with the smugglers to get to a boat, and once its in the water you have to be very careful or you could get people tossed into the water.

People did get tossed into the water and they died precisely because 15 officers could not be bothered to do their job.

You do known repeating rubbish does not make it correct. You have not managed to suggest what could have been done. Just claim they did nothing whch the news article shows is incorrect. The officers did what they could but once the boat launched there was nothing they could do except call for help.

[President Merkin]

Rufus Stone said:

And they were almost certainly in a safe country before arriving in France. But that doesn't change my comment.

Or international law. Always the same old why don't they stop at the first safe country? nonsense.

[Bo_apex]

crankedup5 said:

French police officers did seem to be actively stopping Liverpool football fans accessing a stadium to watch a match last year. Plenty of brutality and liberal use of pepper spray used to keep out those that had rights of access.
Demonstrates that they do have the powers, just choice when, where and to whom it’s administered perhaps.

^^this^^

I've witnessed plenty of effective Policing from Marseilles to Cannes. Pepper spray is one of their default modes.

But, French Police are highly selective in what they choose to engage with.

[Unreal]

valiant said:

Unreal said:

I find it hard to believe anyone really believes it will.

If however, you had no documents on arrival and were coached up to Brize Norton and in Rwanda a few hours later, I think that it might.

Bearing in mind there’s approx 40000 migrants ahead of you and similar for previous years, I think you’ll be waiting in Brize Norton’s departure lounge for an awfully long time.

That's why I said if.

[Mr Penguin]

President Merkin said:

Or international law. Always the same old why don't they stop at the first safe country? nonsense.

The fact that they can go shopping is a big reason why so many die needlessly.

[philv]

Wheb did the french navy join the tory party?
As it is apparantly all the tories' fault.

[President Merkin]

Mr Penguin said:

President Merkin said:

Or international law. Always the same old why don't they stop at the first safe country? nonsense.

The fact that they can go shopping is a big reason why so many die needlessly.

That's as maybe, howeverm they are neverthrless under no obligation to claim asylum anywhere other than a country of their choosing. However, the UK has removed just about all legal routes, enablng the smuggling trade, so things are nowhere near as black and white as you would have people believe.

[Mr Penguin]

President Merkin said:

That's as maybe, howeverm they are neverthrless under no obligation to claim asylum anywhere other than a country of their choosing. However, the UK has removed just about all legal routes, enablng the smuggling trade, so things are nowhere near as black and white as you would have people believe.

Even with legal routes, there will be smugglers, simply because demand to live here is higher than the numbers we can realistically accommodate.

[President Merkin]

Can you hear that? That's the sound of your position shifting.

[Gecko1978]

President Merkin said:

Mr Penguin said:

President Merkin said:

Or international law. Always the same old why don't they stop at the first safe country? nonsense.

The fact that they can go shopping is a big reason why so many die needlessly.

That's as maybe, howeverm they are neverthrless under no obligation to claim asylum anywhere other than a country of their choosing. However, the UK has removed just about all legal routes, enablng the smuggling trade, so things are nowhere near as black and white as you would have people believe.

I wonder how they will feel when they are met on the beach and then taken to holding center an put on a plane to Rawanda. People sky interviwed did not feel they could be sent there as its not safe but we have passed a law to say it is. How will we get people on a plane ffs

[Mr Penguin]

President Merkin said:

Can you hear that? That's the sound of your position shifting.

No, I've already said the whole thing is a mess and the law needs to be reformed as well as offering legal routes and clamping down on them.

[President Merkin]

Mr Penguin said:

No, I've already said the whole thing is a mess and the law needs to be reformed as well as offering legal routes and clamping down on them.

Well yes actually. First you say they're shopping, & it's their own fault. Then when it's pointed out to you the UK has pulled up the drawbridge, you say they'd still come because nice here. To be fair you're slippery & that's ok but let's not pretend you're not slippery all the same

[crankedup5]

Mrr T said:

crankedup5 said:

272BHP said:

Mrr T said:

FFS. Bystanders as the word suggests stand and do nothing. They where fighting with the smugglers who where stopping getting to the boats. As a result they did not get to the boat before it launched. What else where they supported to do swim the channel with the boat?

Are you telling me 15 trained police officers (at least) could not stop a boat being launched?

Time for them to hand their badges in.

French police officers did seem to be actively stopping Liverpool football fans accessing a stadium to watch a match last year. Plenty of brutality and liberal use of pepper spray used to keep out those that had rights of access.
Demonstrates that they do have the powers, just choice when, where and to whom it’s administered perhaps.

You do understand the difference between a football stadium policed by riot police and a sandy beach where you are having to fight with the smugglers to get to a boat, and once its in the water you have to be very careful or you could get people tossed into the water.

Yup, the football stadium scenario was a situation caused by people who had paid for entry tickets to watch a football match. The second scenario was people who wanted to make a journey across the English channel for the purpose of making an illegal entry into the U.K. Something that the U.K. is paying the French to stop.

[crankedup5]

Gecko1978 said:

President Merkin said:

Mr Penguin said:

President Merkin said:

Or international law. Always the same old why don't they stop at the first safe country? nonsense.

The fact that they can go shopping is a big reason why so many die needlessly.

That's as maybe, howeverm they are neverthrless under no obligation to claim asylum anywhere other than a country of their choosing. However, the UK has removed just about all legal routes, enablng the smuggling trade, so things are nowhere near as black and white as you would have people believe.

I wonder how they will feel when they are met on the beach and then taken to holding center an put on a plane to Rawanda. People sky interviwed did not feel they could be sent there as its not safe but we have passed a law to say it is. How will we get people on a plane ffs

We can hire French riot police to escort people onto a aircraft, they do seem to have persuade people to comply with their requests.