Acid attack in Clapham

[PawsAndReflection]

Has anyone else seen this horrible news story? Apparently 9 people have been injured, looks like the original targets were a woman and two children.

What is WRONG with people?!

We can vet and choose

If we take say 60k we can easily find 60k who are upstanding citizens and / or female

That's true for migrants.

But not the case for refugees

Yes currently that is correct

I’d like to see it change

I never said it was, just that i think atm we are heading that way, as another poster said, we go for the extremes.
It wasn't very long ago that a migrant boat was sunk off the coast of Greece with 800 deaths, no one seemed to care that this sinking was caused by a Greek coastal patrol boat.
No great outrage/demands for an enquiry or even a thread on MN, no one cared.

Boats sink in the med, 100s die at a time, it barely makes the news.

Just prevent the boats from entering UK waters.

There shouldn’t be any thanks. Aid is not charity. Notice that it’s not the poorest countries that receive the most aid.

It amounts to bribery that allows the west to continue extracting resources from other countries without paying for them properly to the disbenefit of locals. The adverts keep going on because essentially government officials are being paid off, so there is no incentive for them to look after their people. Then the moment that the countries government says no a war will be engineered for regime change and locals suffer even more. Rinse and repeat. Even charities with the best of intentions are steered to working in useful countries because of how they will receive government funding. Never has the UK done anything that is not for the benefit of the UK.

Apparently, the Cons remove the migrants from one hotel in say Bicester and move them to a hotel in Milton Keynes, this counts as Migrants "removed from a hotel.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-kent-67495760

All makes the figures look good "50 Hotels closed down..." job done.

Enough to make one cynical of politicians.

Like i said, leaving migrants to drown is just around the corner, there would be plenty who would support this in the UK.

I don’t think so. There is a reason that the UK populace is kept unaware of actions abroad. Even with anti-refugee sentiment, no party would be voted back in if they blithely murdered people just offshore.

Aus doesn’t let anyone drown.

Fewer crossings than the Med

The last caller on Times said move to Aus.. made me chortle. They are the only ones who’ve solved it

(Tf we’ve got the option)

It's not anti refugee to object to illegal immigrants

Who has the most drownings?

Must be Med crossings surely

It won't be a country with a strong deterrent

If we rescue migrants in the channel & take them to the UK, how is that different to what happens now?

Aus had an empty island with ready access too, all migrants were then sent there.

We don't.

Rwanda can at full capacity take 10k migrants over 5 years, thats less than 5% of the migrants (on current trends) coming here.

@sunick If we block them entering UK waters, where do they go? they ve no fuel to return to France.
Obviously, if we did this a few times it would certainly be a deterrent but there would be an awful cost.

we are heading for very dark times.

We don’t need an island just an alternative location

Correct.

But unless I've completely misunderstood some posts, there are those who want to see the current procedures end, for UK to leave the convention on the treatment of refugees, to be able to turn down asylum seekers on basis of their sex, and to deport people to countries they are fleeing even though that leaves them facing persecution, torture or execution.

And to impose new restrictions - based on desirability - for deciding refugee status, rather than the current norms.

Presumably some would be happy with the idea of returning all boys to Ukraine as soon as they turn 18 and are no longer juveniles because we don't want adult make refugees (and logically would then have to return them regardless of risk)

Taransay Scotland - 700 uninhabited off the Falklands

Has someone suggested that? I must have missed it.

Aus is still part of international conventions

Well the Clapham case did not involve an illegal immigrant. so what has that got to do with the subject? Do you understand what an illegal immigrant actually is?

Are you Australian @EasternStandard ?

I have wondered why a remote Scottish island or the Falklands hasn't been suggested.
I think Ascension Island was mentioned but i think its strategic importance ruled it out.

Rwanda is currently dealing with a migrant crisis of its own from the CAR, wonder how long they will want UK ones.

I have dual citizenship, born in U.K. but just applied for passports for all dc, partly due to watching this mess stagnate and seeing how poor people are at thinking ahead

I’m very happy here in London but also very glad we have the option

@EasternStandard the Australian method will never work. For one, the Navy has refused to partake in redirecting these boats on a permanent basis, in part because it’s inhumane. I was both impressed and in shock.

I was being slightly flippant - someone mentioned that we might end up torpedoing the small boats or something like that à la the Russians and Somali pirates.

@jasflowers Rwanda has absolutely no intention of keeping those refugees. They know the refugees will be smuggled out of the country immediately and will likely be trafficked back to Europe or elsewhere. There were some interesting articles about when Israel tried this, apparently the traffickers got them in days and there were concerns that government employees were involved.