brexit?!!?

[ronde_des_sylphes]

If someone would like to start a poll

Schumann poll posted!
https://www.pianostreet.com/smf/index.php?topic=62413

In fairness I think I like one piano piece Schumann wrote

[ahinton]

Because stopping a migration of Exodus proportions is to their benefit as much as ours.

UK cannot stop immigrants, be they illegal, economic, dispossessed refugees or otherwise from entering any other EU member state or indeed any other country at all; each country must make its own decision on such matters. That said, I repeat (sorry about that!) - where would you expect these people (other than the illegals, that is) to go?

Best,

Alistair

[ahinton]

I do not have nor have ever had any regard for you whatsoever and do not give a monkeys testicle what you think of me.

Ad hominems do not a constructive discussion make. The only monkeys involved here were arguably those in government (of whom some might well be testicularly challenged for all that I know) who set this charade in motion in the first place and now seem not to have a clue what to do.

Best,

Alistair

[ahinton]

Well it wasn't. Live with it.

Although as Scot (as you know), I live in England; it's up to the Scots who live in Scotland, not to me, to decide to "live with it" or not in accordance with whether or not the terms under which the opinion poll was held were democratcially acceptable to them and, if not, whether to hold a second referendum with a view to extricating them from an UK that holds them in the kind of disregard that the result of that poll demonstrates.

Best,

Alistair

[ahinton]

I do not recall there has any been a referendum amongst members and I would not be so certain of the result.

There hasn't, as far as I know and, as all of us now know, we cannot be certain of any referndum result until it's been announced!

If someone would like to start a poll, I would be inclined to have a referendum amongst myself and vote to leave the forum should the forum vote for his greatness.

Schumann was not so great a composer that an opinion poll on this forum whose result happened to displease you would warrant your departing as a member thereof, so please put that thought out of your head immediately (not that it will be worth even having unless someone DOES start such a poll here!)...

I have been here too long and am getting pissed off with all this Euro loving left wing crap.[/quote]

"Too long" for what? And please remember that there are many Tories who favoured and still do favour Remain, so your description here is false; for example, I'd not be inclined to describe our present and immediate past Chancellor and Prime Minister as "left wing", would you?

Best,

Alistair

[ahinton]

Now now. I'm probably one of the biggest lefties here and I'm really not that convinced by the EU. I award it 3 Schumanns out of 5.

Wasn't that Schumann one of those Germans who let in squillions of refugees, illegal immigrants an' all?...

Best,

Alistair

[ronde_des_sylphes]

.. those people who try to do this are not for the most part illegal immigrants but refugees and economic migrants in a desperate situation who cannot possibly continue to survive in their own countries - and they all have to go somewhere. If you were from Aleppo, or Tripoli, or Baghdad or wherever, would you stay put and make no effort to escape from what life threw at you there and try to enter a coutry where you'd stand some chance of being treated like a civilised human being?

This is where I have one of my biggest problems with the whole debate (or rather, lack of it). There are far too few people making this salient and eminently reasonable argument, and, over the years, far too many who have shouted "racist" at their opponents on the anti-immigration side.

[ahinton]

It is only a small percentage of that exodus that end up in Calais, etc. Figures show that far more have ended up in Germany, for example. And in any case, my point is that if the French don't want to deal with immigrants they now have an active incentive to facilitate their passage, illegal or otherwise, to the UK. Previously they were at least slightly constrained by being part of the same formal community/quasi super-state, however you wish to define it.

Absolutely right! Immigration into UK, just like everything else in UK (if there still is an UK), will be solely UK's problem should Brexit eventually prevail.

Best,

Alistair

[thalbergmad]

That said, I repeat (sorry about that!) - where would you expect these people (other than the illegals, that is) to go?

Turkey, Italy or Greece or where they first arrived.

Thal

[thalbergmad]

Of course there is, but those people who try to do this are not for the most part illegal immigrants but refugees and economic migrants in a desperate situation who cannot possibly continue to survive in their own countries - and they all have to go somewhere. If you were from Aleppo, or Tripoli, or Baghdad or wherever, would you stay put and make no effort to escape from what life threw at you there and try to enter a coutry where you'd stand some chance of being treated like a civilised human being?

I don't blame them for trying to come. I hope they don't blame some of us for trying to keep them out.

Thal

[ahinton]

This is where I have one of my biggest problems with the whole debate (or rather, lack of it). There are far too few people making this salient and eminently reasonable argument, and, over the years, far too many who have shouted "racist" at their opponents on the anti-immigration side.

Quite. The worst such attitudes are to be found in the kinds of mindless xenophobe that have no interest even in discriminating between types of immigrants whom the country needs to aid its economy, those who have a right to be here because they're citizens of other EU member states, those who are economic migrants (who could still be of benefit to the country), those who are dispossessed refugees from conflict-torn and terrorist-ridden areas and illegal immigrants, preferring instead to lump them all into a single over-simplistic category of "undesirable foreigners". The joke about "all these Lithuanians, Latvians and Estonians coming over to England and taking our jobs" when told by members of England's Polish community perhaps neatly illustrates the absurdity of this.

According to https://www.migrationwatchuk.org/statistics-population-country-birth , "the Office for National Statistics (ONS) estimate(s) that in 2014, 8.3 million people living in the UK were born abroad, around 13% of the total population of the UK. Of these, 3 million were from countries now in the European Union and 5.3 million were from non-EU countries". The total number of immigrants in UK is probably now nearer 9m. Add to that tally the number of 5.4m living in Scotland, 3.2m living in Wales and 4.7 in NI and knock off, say, 300,000 to allow for immigrants living in those countries and you arrive at a total of around 21.3m. Send all of those back - or away - or somewhere - and the total UK population would fall by around 30% at a stroke. Remove some 30% of the population of almost any developed country and you'd risk bringing it to a standstill.

As to the racist hate crimes of which official figures of reported ones in UK have risen in the wake of the referendum result, it is clear that anything that might help to foment racial hatred will have an adverse impact upon any country where it occurs. Should UK leave EU and also break up into three or four constituent parts and should the rise of nationalism and populism (on which Mr Juncker has expressed fears) risk further disturbing and possibly even destroying EU over time, it would not be hard to imagine the subsequent European climate in which nations would find themselves against other nations and racist bigotry might become rampant - ad we can all easily figure out to what that might lead, since we've been there before (or at least previous generations have done so).

Even the expression "an Englishman's (why not also Englishwoman's?) home is his castle" in one sense typifies the kind of insularity that, if unchecked, can turn into the kind of racism that we've all either witnessed or read or heard about; it's hardly ever true in any case, since the majority of English persons' homes belong to the landlord or the mortgage lender...

Best,

Alistair

[thalbergmad]

What are you doing, you have crossed through nearly all your words.

I guess one must be thankful.

Thal

[ahinton]

Turkey, Italy or Greece or where they first arrived.

Why these three in particular? (of which two are, of course, EU member states and the other one would like to be but doesn't stand a monkey's testicle of a chance of entering).

You add "or where they first arrived". What if that's UK? Is that OK by you? And why are you seeking to "protect" all countries from immigrants, including refugees, on the sole grounds that they happen not to have either land or sea borders with those countries from which immigrants have come? - in other words, why would it be OK by you for immigrants to try to enter immediately neighbouring countries but not to cross countries with a view to entering ones that are not neighbouring? In any event, of the three that you specify above, the two that are EU member states do not directly neighbour any countries from which more than a few very immigrants come.

Best,

Alistair

[ahinton]

I don't blame them for trying to come. I hope they don't blame some of us for trying to keep them out.

But if they didn't do that, I ask again, where would they be expected to try to go if all European countries adopted the same stance of "trying to keep them out"?

Best,

Alistair

[ronde_des_sylphes]

In fairness to what I presume Thal's point of view to be, it was my understanding that they are supposed to claim asylum in the first EU country they arrive in.

[thalbergmad]

In fairness to what I presume Thal's point of view to be, it was my understanding that they are supposed to claim asylum in the first EU country they arrive in.

Exactly, but they are waived through as nobody really wants them and the problems that arise from letting them in. Germany and Sweden have found to their cost the problems of inviting thousands in.

Thal

[thalbergmad]

But if they didn't do that, I ask again, where would they be expected to try to go if all European countries adopted the same stance of "trying to keep them out"?

Saudi Arabia for instance. Oh I forgot, they don't want them either.

Thal

[ahinton]

What are you doing, you have crossed through nearly all your words.

I guess one must be thankful.

What caused that I cannot tell, unless the inserted (s) was interpreted as though a strikethrough; anyway, apologies - it's amended now.

Best,

Alistair

[thalbergmad]

You add "or where they first arrived". What if that's UK?

Highly unlikely if they are from Syria or Afghanistan. But if they arrive here first then their claim must be duly processed here.

Thal

[ahinton]

Exactly, but they are waived through as nobody really wants them and the problems that arise from letting them in. Germany and Sweden have found to their cost the problems of inviting thousands in.

You mean "waved", not "waived".

Were the attitude of "nobody really wants them", should it become universal, would leave the problem unsolved, though, wouldn't it? They still have to go somewhere.

Again, I ask, what would you feel and what would you try and hope to do if you came from Aleppo and had lost all your possessions and had no safe building in which to live?

Best,

Alistair

[ahinton]

Saudi Arabia for instance. Oh I forgot, they don't want them either.

But that doesn't provide an answer, though, does it? And in any event there are some oppressed and persecuted people who try to get to EU nations fromSaudi Arabia anyway, although these are of course not in the majority.

Best,

Alistair

[ahinton]

Highly unlikely if they are from Syria or Afghanistan. But if they arrive here first then their claim must be duly processed here.

Indeed - and, for once, that's a fair answer insofar as it goes - but it is still based around your implicit view that immigrants should only try to get into neighbouring countries and the logic behind that is far from clear.

Best,

Alistair

[thalbergmad]

Again, I ask, what would you feel and what would you try and hope to do if you came from Aleppo and had lost all your possessions and had no safe building in which to live?

Bearing in mind that the vast majority of these so called migrants are young and male, I would not be deserting my family and trying to leg it to safety. I would be signing up to the armed forces which represented my cause and fighting for my future, not dumping myself on another Country.

We are only a tiny little overcrowded Island, thousands of miles from these troubled zones, so the migrants should be taken care of way before they reach Calais.

If you are happy to let them in, where will they live?, what hospitals will they go to?, what doctors or dentists will they visit?, what roads will they drive on?, what schools will their children go to? We have nowhere near the infrastructure to cope with the consistent levels of immigration we are seeing and it will never bother people like you until they are dumped in large numbers on your doorstep.

Thal

[ahinton]

Bearing in mind that the vast majority of these so called migrants are young and male, I would not be deserting my family and trying to leg it to safety. I would be signing up to the armed forces which represented my cause and fighting for my future, not dumping myself on another Country.

You might no longer have a family left to desert. "Armed forces"? Which of the more than 100 groups of fighers in Syria, for example, would you try to join? And how would you determine which of them, if any, might "represent your cause and fight for your future" or even stand the remotest chance of "winning", especially if US, Russian and other forces get drawn into the conflicts?

We are only a tiny little overcrowded Island, thousands of miles from these troubled zones, so the migrants should be taken care of way before they reach Calais.

We are a relatively small island but not overcrowded.

If you are happy to let them in, where will they live?, what hospitals will they go to?, what doctors or dentists will they visit?, what roads will they drive on?, what schools will their children go to? We have nowhere near the infrastructure to cope with the consistent levels of immigration we are seeing

No, we don't - and nor, for that matter, do Germany and France which, whilst much larger than UK, are hardly nearer to those embattled zones - but admission of that fact and asking all of those perfectly valid and imortant questions still doesn't provide answers to where these people should go. You mentioned Italy, Greece, Turkey and countries immediately neighbouring those from which would-be immigrants try to come in some kind of attempt to provide an amorphous non-commital answer to the question of where they should go; do you believe that any of those countries has the infrastructure to cope, especially if they were to become the only ones to which immigrants could go?

What also needs to be duly considered is what to do if and when such conflict zones expand and become even less stable and more dangerous than they are now - and if there become more of them; the refugee crisis will expand proportionately but will still require solutions. Europe is probably quite lucky that it has so far had comparatively small numbers of immigrants from African nations, of which quite a few are poor and unstable and some are war-torn; IS, Al-Shabaab, Boko Haram and Al-Qaeda are also increasingly exerting adverse influence in parts of Africa and are likely to create more of the kinds of havoc and distress that will inevitably provide increasing impetus for emigration from those areas. All of thos people will have to go somewhere, too.

I'm not suggesting for one moment that this is a problem with easy solutions - far from it - but it is an ever present problem that's only ever likely to increase.

That said, it's got nothing to do with Brexit!

Best,

Alistair

[thalbergmad]

We are a relatively small island but not overcrowded.

Try coming to my part of the World where many of these immigrants end up. You are OK as they do not tend to end up at remote farmhouses, but if they did, perhaps you might change your tune.

Besides, we have a chronic house shortage, chronic primary school shortage, an NHS that increasingly cannot cope, and a huge shortage of GP's. The present levels of immigration, illegal and otherwise, is unsustainable.

As to where these people should go, i have to say i do not care as long as it is not here. Since the majority from Afghanistan and Syria are Muslims, it would be best for them and us if they went to Countries where their piss pathetic tribal differences and their intolerances would be more in line with the extant population.

Thal

[thalbergmad]

All of thos people will have to go somewhere, too.

How about Scotland?? The population density there is far less than in England and they (as I am frequently told on this forum) voted to stay in the EU, so should be assisting with their problems.

We can start with the 10,000 at Calais, 3,000 at Dunkirk, 250,000 in Libya and 1,000,000 in Turkey. Simply employ the Navy to ferry them all to somewhere like Harris or The Shetlands which are very sparsely populated. Then, these sporran wearing caber tossing morons might reconsider their vote.

Thal

[thalbergmad]

Since Hinty and Juncker have both been prattling on about hate attacks on Poles, how about the 1,000 or so Polish criminals that are currently held in UK jails at great expense?? Are they all innocent??

And some choice others that have been let in:

The 41 year old Latvian who killed 14 year old Alice Gross in London.
The Polish National Ireneusz Bartnowski who murdered an elderly couple with a claw hammer.
Lithuanian Victor Ajulic who had raped a girl of 7 in his homeland and then carried out another rape over here.
Slovakian Victor Lakatos who attacked an elderly jeweller with a knuckleduster.

There would be insufficient space on this forum to list all the crimes committed by EU nationals in the UK, but all the looney left spazzies want to speak off is a Pole who was killed.

Thal

[thalbergmad]

To really upset the silly lefties, I would like to offer my congratulations to the locals at Bautzen near Dresden in Germany who have fought back against the infestation of their town.

Well done indeed.

Thal

[ahinton]

Try coming to my part of the World where many of these immigrants end up. You are OK as they do not tend to end up at remote farmhouses, but if they did, perhaps you might change your tune.

I did not say that nowhere in UK is overcrowded; I said that UK as a whole is not overcrowded.

Besides, we have a chronic house shortage, chronic primary school shortage, an NHS that increasingly cannot cope, and a huge shortage of GP's. The present levels of immigration, illegal and otherwise, is unsustainable.

We don't have the infrastructure to support half the people already living in UK. So waht? We might eventually get it, we might not. Is it so different in other counties?

As to where these people should go, i have to say i do not care as long as it is not here.

NIMBY. Indeed. Very helpful.

Since the majority from Afghanistan and Syria are Muslims, it would be best for them and us if they went to Countries where their piss pathetic tribal differences and their intolerances would be more in line with the extant population.

Do you realise how many Muslims there are across the world? They're hardly confined to countries from which refugees come.

Best,

Alistair

[ahinton]

How about Scotland?? The population density there is far less than in England and they (as I am frequently told on this forum) voted to stay in the EU, so should be assisting with their problems.

We can start with the 10,000 at Calais, 3,000 at Dunkirk, 250,000 in Libya and 1,000,000 in Turkey. Simply employ the Navy to ferry them all to somewhere like Harris or The Shetlands which are very sparsely populated. Then, these sporran wearing caber tossing morons might reconsider their vote.

Ad hominem again. But why not indeed? I did say that UK is not all overpopulated. There are plenty of places with space, not only in Scotland.

What you forget, however, is that if disaffected people from many African countries and the Middle East and then China and India start to tgrun up on the European doorstep, there simply won;t be the numbers of people to do anything about it.

Best,

Alistair

[ronde_des_sylphes]

Since Hinty and Juncker have both been prattling on about hate attacks on Poles, how about the 1,000 or so Polish criminals that are currently held in UK jails at great expense?? Are they all innocent??

And some choice others that have been let in:

The 41 year old Latvian who killed 14 year old Alice Gross in London.
The Polish National Ireneusz Bartnowski who murdered an elderly couple with a claw hammer.
Lithuanian Victor Ajulic who had raped a girl of 7 in his homeland and then carried out another rape over here.
Slovakian Victor Lakatos who attacked an elderly jeweller with a knuckleduster.

At least two of the above cases partly resulted as a consequence of a failure to share intelligence (ie the person in question was known to the authorities in their native country but the information hadn't been passed on). Not, of course, that that is any consolation to the families of their victims. And I do agree with what I assume to be your implied position that foreign nationals found guilty of imprisonable offences should be deported without delay.

There is an interesting page on Wikipedia regarding this: quote "On 30 June 2013 there were 10,786 prisoners from 160 different countries in the jails of England and Wales  Poland, Jamaica and the Irish Republic formed the highest percentage of foreign nationals in UK prisons. In total, foreigners represented 13% of the prison population, whereas foreign nationals are 13% of the total population in England and Wales."

Of course the UK has also been quite good at exporting criminals abroad, not that two wrongs make a right.

[ahinton]

Since Hinty and Juncker have both been prattling on about hate attacks on Poles, how about the 1,000 or so Polish criminals that are currently held in UK jails at great expense?? Are they all innocent??

And some choice others that have been let in:

The 41 year old Latvian who killed 14 year old Alice Gross in London.
The Polish National Ireneusz Bartnowski who murdered an elderly couple with a claw hammer.
Lithuanian Victor Ajulic who had raped a girl of 7 in his homeland and then carried out another rape over here.
Slovakian Victor Lakatos who attacked an elderly jeweller with a knuckleduster.

There would be insufficient space on this forum to list all the crimes committed by EU nationals in the UK, but all the looney left spazzies want to speak off is a Pole who was killed.

So the police are all of the loony left, are they? I hadn't realised. Did I suggest that there are no criminals in UK from other counries? Of course not. I merely pointed out - and they're not my statistics - that, in the wake of the referendum outcome, reported racial hate crimes increased. That's all; no more, no less.

You sometimes don't even read short paragraphs, it would seem.

Best,

Alistair

[ahinton]

At least two of the above cases partly resulted as a consequence of a failure to share intelligence (ie the person in question was known to the authorities in their native country but the information hadn't been passed on). Not, of course, that that is any consolation to the families of their victims. And I do agree with what I assume to be your implied position that foreign nationals found guilty of imprisonable offences should be deported without delay.

Broadly speaking, I agree with that as well in most circumstances.

There is an interesting page on Wikipedia regarding this: quote "On 30 June 2013 there were 10,786 prisoners from 160 different countries in the jails of England and Wales  Poland, Jamaica and the Irish Republic formed the highest percentage of foreign nationals in UK prisons. In total, foreigners represented 13% of the prison population, whereas foreign nationals are 13% of the total population in England and Wales."

Thank you for this.

Of course the UK has also been quite good at exporting criminals abroad, not that two wrongs make a right.

Quite so!

And to return to Thal's suggestion that refugees be sent to Scotland as there's more space there, he should perhaps bear in mind, however, that there'll be considerably less if all the Scots in England, Wales and NI (to say nothing of the rest of EU) are to be sent back there...

Best,

Alistair

[ronde_des_sylphes]

How about Scotland?? The population density there is far less than in England and they (as I am frequently told on this forum) voted to stay in the EU, so should be assisting with their problems.

We can start with the 10,000 at Calais, 3,000 at Dunkirk, 250,000 in Libya and 1,000,000 in Turkey. Simply employ the Navy to ferry them all to somewhere like Harris or The Shetlands which are very sparsely populated. Then, these sporran wearing caber tossing morons might reconsider their vote.

The Scottish government has pledged to take in refugees, just not 1.263m of them (it hasn't met with universal approval). I think neither sporran-wearing nor caber-tossing is especially prevalent in my country. I shall conduct a moron count at the soonest opportunity.  

[ahinton]

To relay upset the silly lefties, I would like to offer my congratulations to the locals at Bautzen near Dresden in Germany who have fought back against the infestation of their town.

Well done indeed.

So people will go somewhere else, then. Everyone has to go somewhere, as I've said previously. I take it that you'd not want all those people to be sent to Gravesend, right?

But can we please get back to discussing Brexit here instead of immigration and refugee problems? I'm not seeking to undermine the latter but, as it has little place in this thread, perhaps those who keep plugging away at it here wold like to start a new thread on that topic; it is an important one, indeed and is only ever going to get more so as the numbers of such people increase as they almost certainly always will.

Best,

Alistair

[ahinton]

The Scottish government has pledged to take in refugees, just not 1.263m of them (it hasn't met with universal approval). I think neither sporran-wearing nor caber-tossing is especially prevalent in my country. I shall conduct a moron count at the soonest opportunity.  

Yes; reliable statistics amenable to corroboration would be appreciated and helpful(!). Whisky drinking, on the other hand, is known to take place outside Scotland (the Welsh even make one), though not a great deal of it in Iraq, Afghanistan and Syria as far as I am aware...

Best,

Alistair

[thalbergmad]

I did not say that nowhere in UK is overcrowded; I said that UK as a whole is not overcrowded.
We don't have the infrastructure to support half the people already living in UK. So waht? We might eventually get it, we might not. Is it so different in other counties?
NIMBY. Indeed. Very helpful.

The part of the Country you live in may not be overcrowded, but my part is. You are suffering from "I'm alright Jack" Syndrome. You might change your views if an immigration centre were set up in your small village and it was not safe to go out at night.

If we do not have the infrastructure to support the extant population, it is not possible to continue to take in hundreds of thousands more.

Thal

[thalbergmad]

You sometimes don't even read short paragraphs, it would see.

Mainly long ones. Your arguments would be better balanced if you were to show some consideration for the extant population who have suffered from the effects of mass immigration.

Thal

[thalbergmad]

Of course the UK has also been quite good at exporting criminals abroad, not that two wrongs make a right.

When not overruled by EU courts.

Thal

[ronde_des_sylphes]

Of course the UK has also been quite good at exporting criminals abroad, not that two wrongs make a right.

When not overruled by EU courts.

I was referring to our indigenous undesirables. Spain is, I believe, a common residence.

[ahinton]

The part of the Country you live in may not be overcrowded, but my part is.

I did not suggest otherwise in either case, although one could say that any city area is "overcrowded".

You are suffering from "I'm alright Jack" Syndrome.

How so? Did I suggest that I am opposed to immigrants coming to the area in which I live? Whilst in my area there are not so very many western European immigrants, there are, as I have mentioned before, plenty of Polish, Latvian, Lithuanian and Estonian people as well as some Russians, Ukrainians, and Moldovans and a smaller number of Albanians, Romanians and Bulgarians; as far as I can tell, most have found work and a few have started up businesses. I am aware of no racial hae crime in the area although I suppose there might have been a handful of instances. OK, that's a different kind of immigration to that of refugees, of course, especially as the majority of these people come from other EU mamber states.

You might change your views if an immigration centre were set up in your small village and it was not safe to go out at night.

The issue here is that I doubt that anyone would want to set such up such a centre is no remate a prt of the country and the nearest village to me is over a mile away anyway. Is it really safe to go out at night anywhere? Obviously, it's bound to be less so in a city than in a rural area purely becuase the population figures and concentration of people are vastly greater - but safety to go out at any time in tgerms of crime is down to all criminals and it is quite wrong to associate immigrants with crime as though they're the majority of those who commit them.

If we do not have the infrastructure to support the extant population, it is not possible to continue to take in hundreds of thousands more.

I agree wholeheartedly that this will be very difficult but, as long as there will be increasing numbers of genuine refugees, they'll all have to go somewhere; where they are now, it's not safe to go out at any time of day and some can't even go "in" anyway because of the shortage of safe buildings left into which to go.

Lessons need to be learned from all of this because those who foment terrorist activity, war and the rest have no respect for human life and so are wilfully exacerbating the problem with every second that passes; iondeed, it would not surprise me if, by the time that the EU negotiations end (if ever they commence) that the number of refugees across the world will have risen to at least 10 times what it is now and it could well be much greate than that. It will then no longer be merely unwise but also impossible to ignore and, yes, it will likely affect many parts of the "civilised" world adversely - but what can be done to stop it altogether unless the countries in which the actions of opposing factions create the refugee problem in the first place get their respective acts together? Fat chance of that!

Again, however, this is for another thread should you or someone else decide to create one; this thread is about BREXIT!

Best,

Alistair

[ronde_des_sylphes]

Lessons need to be learned from all of this because those who foment terrorist activity, war and the rest have no respect for human life and so are wilfully exacerbating the problem with every second that passes; iondeed, it would not surprise me if, by the time that the EU negotiations end (if ever they commence) that the number of refugees across the world will have risen to at least 10 times what it is now and it could well be much greate than that. It will then no longer be merely unwise but also impossible to ignore and, yes, it will likely affect many parts of the "civilised" world adversely - but what can be done to stop it altogether unless the countries in which the actions of opposing factions create the refugee problem in the first place get their respective acts together?

Rightly or wrongly, I fundamentally believe that Putin has no genuine interest in stabilising Syria et al., as the constant outflow of refugees and the problem of where they go pressurises state infrastructure, consequently destabilising the EU.

[ahinton]

Mainly long ones. Your arguments would be better balanced if you were to show some consideration for the extant population who have suffered from the effects of mass immigration.

Again, you must distinguish here between the different kinds of immigrant as outlined by me above for your arguments to carry weight.

In your perfectly correct remarks about UK infrastructure you have rightly referred to NHS, but without taking account of the fact that all of its immense current problems would be very much greater and would have arisen a good deal sooner had there been less immigrants in UK; NHS is by far UK's largest employer and is heavily dependent upon immigrant workers at all levels.

Whilst we all know that you disapporve of the Guardian, the statistics in https://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/jan/26/nhs-foreign-nationals-immigration-health-service are merely reported in that newspapaer - they are not of their own making. They are also 2 years out of date.

Here's more recent ones from https://fullfact.org/immigration/immigration-and-nhs-staff/ although these relate only to NHS staff from other EU member states, not from elsewhere in the entire world.

This one's more general again and does not specifically relate to NHS but is still well worth reading - https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/uk-migration-six-myths-about-immigration-debunked-as-latest-figures-show-fall-in-non-eu-arrivals-a6895341.html

https://fullfact.org/immigration/some-immigration-facts-factchecked/ will also provide corroborative information about NHS.

You draw no distinction in your remarks between other EU citizens, non-EU citizens and non-European citizens in UK, economic migrants, refugees and illegals; your observations would be "better balanced" if you did. Whilst agreeing that illegals need to be rooted out and deported as far as possible (although this is far from easy), it is clear that immigrantion to UK has benefitted it as well as having some adverse effects, but that is not merely my personal opinion; it's based upon facts of the kind that you can read in the above links and elsewhere.

Best,

Alistair

[ahinton]

Rightly or wrongly, I fundamentally believe that Putin has no genuine interest in stabilising Syria et al., as the constant outflow of refugees and the problem of where they go pressurises state infrastructure, consequently destabilising the EU.

In agreeing, I don't think that Putin is alone in this; very few people other than charity workers in such endangered places give one of Thal's "monkey's testicles" for what happens to refugees therefrom as long as, pace Thal himself, they go "somewhere else"; NIMBYism's as endemic as terrorism in most such areas.

Best,

Alistair

[thalbergmad]

In your perfectly correct remarks about UK infrastructure you have rightly referred to NHS, but without taking account of the fact that all of its immense current problems would be very much greater and would have arisen a good deal sooner had there been less immigrants in UK; NHS is by far UK's largest employer and is heavily dependent upon immigrant workers at all levels.

The immense problems of the NHS would be very much less if it were a National Health Service and not an International Health Service and whilst they do rely on immigrant workers, perhaps they are needed more in order to attend to the health of the rapidly increasing immigrant population.

Thal

[thalbergmad]

In agreeing, I don't think that Putin is alone in this; very few people other than charity workers in such endangered places give one of Thal's "monkey's testicles" for what happens to refugees therefrom as long as, pace Thal himself, they go "somewhere else"; NIMBYism's as endemic as terrorism in most such areas.

I'm Alright Jackism is endemic in some UK rural areas.

Seeing the horrific problems caused by these refugees especially in Sweden, Finland and Germany and the disgusting way that many behave without any consideration to the local population, I am not amazed that few people care where they go as long as long as they do not have to put up with them.

Forced multiculturism does not work.

Thal

[ahinton]

The immense problems of the NHS would be very much less if it were a National Health Service and not an International Health Service and whilst they do rely on immigrant workers, perhaps they are needed more in order to attend to the health of the rapidly increasing immigrant population.

That's nonsense and, if it were true, it would be so overtly discriminatory as to bring about rafts of mostly successful Human Rights breach challenges in the courts, for which (and for the damages attaching to which) UK's taxpayers would be obliged to fork out. NHS staff - both in hospitals and GP practices - are contracted and paid to attend to all UK citizens who need and request healthcare, not to choose which nationalities to treat and when to treat them.

Best,

Alistair

[ahinton]

I'm Alright Jackism is endemic in some UK rural areas.

I daresay that it's endemic on all manner of areas, not just rural ones; NIMBYism is likwise. Neither does anyone any good.

Seeing the horrific problems caused by these refugees especially in Sweden, Finland and Germany and the disgusting way that many behave without any consideration to the local population, I am not amazed that few people care where they go as long as long as they do not have to put up with them.

Forced multiculturism does not work.

Tell that to all those terrorists and other irresponsible warmongers who create the kinds of disastrous situations in which people are disadvantaged, dispossessed and the rest! For all that the avowed aims of most such terrorists and warmongers (other than to spread fear and create the maximum possible havoc, death, injury and destruction as if for its own sake and as an end in itself) are usually pretty unclear, I rather doubt that "forced multiculturalism" is one of them.

In the end, people will find themselves forced to sit up and think about where the refugees are going to go if for no other or better reason than that there'll be so very many of them that their presence will affect the lives of all around them in ever more places - and the more that there are, the harder it will be for anyone to police them, their actions and their journeyings.

It would not be hard, for example, to imagine large swathes of refugees from Noth Korea trying to get to South Korea, Burmese trying to get to India, people from a number of African countries tring even to get to Kenya and South Africa, never mind any of them and many others trying to get to Europe.

"I'm all right Jackism" nor "NIMBYism" will ultimately collapse in a heap under the immense weight of the sheer numbers of refugees from at least 20% of the world's most impoverished and war-torn nations when they're seen to do the only thing that they can possibly do in order to ensure their survival, namely making their way to more civilised nations; I very much doubt that the possibility that, in so doing, they will inadvertently be participating in someone's quaint notion of a "forced multiculturalist" exercise will be uppermost in their minds either.

The peoples of many nations fought on the same side during WWI and WWII under orders from their respective governments; would you see that as an example of "forced multiculturalism" at work?

UK, along with Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, France and to a lesser extent Belgium all have long colonialist histories; I don't know what you think about those, but would you not concede that they all embraced in part what could reasonably be regarded as "forced multiculturalism" on the part of the colonisers?

I presume you to be well aware that these past colonial histories have had a substantial impact upon the countries so colonised and that one more recent outcome of them has been that people from those nations have emigrated to the colonising nations in considerable numbers over the years.

BUT - once more - PLEASE can all of this stuff be moved into a different thread whose topic is populace movement in which all the various kinds of immigration/emigration, the reasons behind them and their impact on the various affected nations (almost all of them, in reality) AND LEAVE THIS THREAD TO CONTINUE TO DISCUSS BREXIT!!!

Best,

Alistair

[thalbergmad]

The peoples of many nations fought on the same side during WWI and WWII under orders from their respective governments; would you see that as an example of "forced multiculturalism" at work?

When you have a common cause, it is so much easier to get along. Anway, they fought together, not lived together.

Thal

[thalbergmad]

That's nonsense and, if it were true, it would be so ovetly discriminatory as to bring about rafts of mostly successful Human Rights breach challenges in the courts, for which (and for the damages attaching to which) UK's taxpayers would be obliged to fork out. NHS staff - both in hospitals and GP practices - are contracted and paid to attend to all UK citizens who need and request healthcare, not to choose which nationalities to treat and when to treat them.

Lets have some more silly court cases that you seem to love so much.

Health tourism is estimated to cost anything between 180 to 250 MILLION POUNDS each year. If you accept this is just, please write to the Inland Revenue to change your tax code so you can help pay for it.

Thal