Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Masked men at Dover - KKK vibes

1000 replies

MumofCandR · 06/09/2026 11:53

They are utter cowards and hypocritical. The same ilk will state they're against the burkha and protests by environmental groups etc. but are happy to mask their faces in 'protest' the reality is they're just nasty specimens of humanity, full of people with self righteous white supremacy tendencies. AIBU.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
26
5128gap · 12/09/2026 21:06

KeepPumping · 12/09/2026 15:58

Fine, but migrants arriving in boats are breaking the law, you can"t police certain groups of British nationals for covering their faces while ignoring other groups that are doing this while allowing boats full of illegal migrants to flood into the country and pretend that the law must be upheld without eventually causing civil disturbance, the government needs to get a grip on this properly, they won"t though so we are definitely heading for a Reform government, I am almost sure of that now.

We're not. Votes don't translate to seats. Reform couldn't secure more seats than the combined moderate to left parties. And that's now before we've even heard the outcome of the multiple investigations. Its the very fact we are not heading for a Reform government that's sparked all this activity from those who wish we were.

LuckyHazelFox · 12/09/2026 21:06

I think the clue is in illegal crossings.

LuckyHazelFox · 12/09/2026 21:08

Yes it's all out there. Some just like being awkward.

EasternStandard · 12/09/2026 21:14

5128gap · 12/09/2026 21:06

We're not. Votes don't translate to seats. Reform couldn't secure more seats than the combined moderate to left parties. And that's now before we've even heard the outcome of the multiple investigations. Its the very fact we are not heading for a Reform government that's sparked all this activity from those who wish we were.

I don’t think anyone can say with certainty what will happen at the next GE.

Switchnow · 12/09/2026 21:16

Did you actually read it?

‘…arriving by small boat is only illegal if you don’t claim asylum – or if you make an asylum claim and it’s rejected’

So, the vast majority have not broken the law, since they claim asylum on arrival, and almost 3/4 claims are accepted.

Switchnow · 12/09/2026 21:18

These men did indeed break the law.

You referred explicitly to people lying and destroying documents. I asked which laws they were breaking and you were unable to identify those laws.

Switchnow · 12/09/2026 21:21

KeepPumping · 12/09/2026 21:04

The same laws as covering your face at a protest.

It’s not yet illegal to simply cover your face at a protest, so I assume you mean ‘none’.

KeepPumping · 12/09/2026 21:24

Switchnow · 12/09/2026 21:16

Did you actually read it?

‘…arriving by small boat is only illegal if you don’t claim asylum – or if you make an asylum claim and it’s rejected’

So, the vast majority have not broken the law, since they claim asylum on arrival, and almost 3/4 claims are accepted.

Can you link to the number of successful claims? There are many other aspects to the crossing that carry legal consequence, do you think throwing children into the sea to distract apprehending vessels should be legal or illegal for example?

" While arriving in the UK without authorisation or helping others to do so have been crimes for more than 50 years"

And why not make the claim in France or one of the multiple EU countries you passed through on your way to the UK as some would have us believe that the EU invented human rights?

www.cps.gov.uk/cps/news/prosecutors-ready-charge-new-channel-crossing-offences

Switchnow · 12/09/2026 21:33

Ok, I didn’t think these powers were in force yet.

Well, now we know what laws face coverings at protests are breaking. Any clue what laws are broken by destroying documents?

KeepPumping · 12/09/2026 21:37

Switchnow · 12/09/2026 21:18

These men did indeed break the law.

You referred explicitly to people lying and destroying documents. I asked which laws they were breaking and you were unable to identify those laws.

Can you tell us when the law changed?

"Asylum claimants found to have destroyed their documents can be prosecuted under a 2004 law passed by the Tony Blair government."

https://www.migrationwatchuk.org/98-of-channel-boat-migrants-have-no-passport/

98% Of Channel Boat Migrants Have No Passport - Migration Watch UK

Just 2% of the thousands who have made their way to the UK illegally in small boats via the English Channel were found to be in possession of a passport at the time of being processed in the UK. The finding emerged in the wake of official data being pu...

https://www.migrationwatchuk.org/98-of-channel-boat-migrants-have-no-passport/

KeepPumping · 12/09/2026 21:40

LuckyHazelFox · 12/09/2026 21:08

Yes it's all out there. Some just like being awkward.

Very noticeable on this thread, the aim seems to be just bash anyone who isn"t actually in a boat and who has an opinion on it and call them names without any knowledge or research on the subject.

LuckyHazelFox · 12/09/2026 21:42

KeepPumping · 12/09/2026 21:40

Very noticeable on this thread, the aim seems to be just bash anyone who isn"t actually in a boat and who has an opinion on it and call them names without any knowledge or research on the subject.

It's all just to try and get you in a muddle. Nit picking with words and phrases.

Switchnow · 12/09/2026 21:49

KeepPumping · 12/09/2026 21:37

Can you tell us when the law changed?

"Asylum claimants found to have destroyed their documents can be prosecuted under a 2004 law passed by the Tony Blair government."

https://www.migrationwatchuk.org/98-of-channel-boat-migrants-have-no-passport/

Yay, you got there in the end!

Do you know why people are almost never prosecuted under that law now?

KeepPumping · 12/09/2026 21:51

Switchnow · 12/09/2026 21:49

Yay, you got there in the end!

Do you know why people are almost never prosecuted under that law now?

Surprise me.

KeepPumping · 12/09/2026 21:52

LuckyHazelFox · 12/09/2026 21:42

It's all just to try and get you in a muddle. Nit picking with words and phrases.

Yes, like human rights lawyers, nobody cares though they just know that voting for the main parties solves nothing.

Switchnow · 12/09/2026 21:54

KeepPumping · 12/09/2026 21:51

Surprise me.

Because it’s superseded by a law that allows prosecution for arriving without entry clearance, punishable by up to four years imprisonment. And there’s a handful of prosecutions for that every year. But mostly it’s not used because it’s a big fucking waste of money. Putting people in prison for a year and then deporting? Assess asylum claims and remove people who shouldn’t be here.

KeepPumping · 12/09/2026 21:57

Switchnow · 12/09/2026 21:54

Because it’s superseded by a law that allows prosecution for arriving without entry clearance, punishable by up to four years imprisonment. And there’s a handful of prosecutions for that every year. But mostly it’s not used because it’s a big fucking waste of money. Putting people in prison for a year and then deporting? Assess asylum claims and remove people who shouldn’t be here.

So are you saying that crossing the channel with intent to land in the UK and escape detection is legal or illegal?

Switchnow · 12/09/2026 22:01

KeepPumping · 12/09/2026 21:57

So are you saying that crossing the channel with intent to land in the UK and escape detection is legal or illegal?

If by ‘escape detection’ you mean arrive by an irregular route and don’t claim
asylum, that would be illegal. But arriving by an irregular route and then claiming asylum is not illegal in itself, no.

Switchnow · 12/09/2026 22:05

KeepPumping · 12/09/2026 21:24

Can you link to the number of successful claims? There are many other aspects to the crossing that carry legal consequence, do you think throwing children into the sea to distract apprehending vessels should be legal or illegal for example?

" While arriving in the UK without authorisation or helping others to do so have been crimes for more than 50 years"

And why not make the claim in France or one of the multiple EU countries you passed through on your way to the UK as some would have us believe that the EU invented human rights?

www.cps.gov.uk/cps/news/prosecutors-ready-charge-new-channel-crossing-offences

The number of successful
asylum claims? It’s published here

https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn01403/

In 2025, 42% of asylum applications were granted at initial decision (not counting withdrawals or ‘administrative outcomes’).

When an application is refused at initial decision, it may be appealed. From 2004 to 2021, around three-quarters (76%) of main applicants refused asylum at initial decision lodged an appeal and around a third (33%) of determined appeals were allowed.

Throwing children or adults into the sea from
any vessel is likely to be an indictable crime, obviously.

Immigration system statistics data tables

Listing of the data tables included in 'Immigration system statistics'.

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistical-data-sets/immigration-system-statistics-data-tables#asylum

KeepPumping · 12/09/2026 22:20

Switchnow · 12/09/2026 22:01

If by ‘escape detection’ you mean arrive by an irregular route and don’t claim
asylum, that would be illegal. But arriving by an irregular route and then claiming asylum is not illegal in itself, no.

If you have no right to asylum and you claim it, is that illegal?

KeepPumping · 12/09/2026 22:22

Switchnow · 12/09/2026 22:05

The number of successful
asylum claims? It’s published here

https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn01403/

In 2025, 42% of asylum applications were granted at initial decision (not counting withdrawals or ‘administrative outcomes’).

When an application is refused at initial decision, it may be appealed. From 2004 to 2021, around three-quarters (76%) of main applicants refused asylum at initial decision lodged an appeal and around a third (33%) of determined appeals were allowed.

Throwing children or adults into the sea from
any vessel is likely to be an indictable crime, obviously.

Edited

Why risk your life in one of the busiest shipping areas in the world, why not claim in France or another EU country?

Switchnow · 12/09/2026 22:24

KeepPumping · 12/09/2026 22:20

If you have no right to asylum and you claim it, is that illegal?

Do you actually know what the grounds for claiming asylum are?

And if you do, how would you decide who had the ‘right’ to it? Well, via the assessment process probably. Which is exactly what happens.

Switchnow · 12/09/2026 22:30

KeepPumping · 12/09/2026 22:22

Why risk your life in one of the busiest shipping areas in the world, why not claim in France or another EU country?

More people settle elsewhere than come to
the UK. People have lots of reasons to make that -as you say - dangerous journey. Language, connection, a belief in being accepted. The availability of illegal working has been described as a draw in the last few years but seems to be quite a crackdown on that over the last 12 months or so. Some people have been refused in other countries. Some people have a family member who will seek asylum in a different country and whoever is successful will try to bring the other as a dependent. Traffickers will persuade people the UK is the best place, so they can charge them more as it’s further and riskier. Of course lots of people think it’s to do with benefits but the benefits in other countries are broadly more generous.

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is not accepting new messages.