To think that the 'Calais Camp' situation needs to be resolved ASAP!

[Kreacherelf]

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3413566/Port-Calais-closed-migrants-storm-harbour-make-Spirit-Britain-ferry-desperate-bid-reach-UK.html

This is just getting ridiculous now. France need to take this problem to the EU and ask for help dealing with it immediately. It has gone on for too long and needs to stop.

I don't know what the answer is. I think the UK should take anyone under 18, and their family members. Other than that, everyone else should have to apply for asylum in France or risk arrest. Not a perfect solution, but the only one I have.

WidowWadman It's the first time I asked. Why do you say I 'keep on asking'?

If she's not in the UK and is unhappy of her own government's treatment of refugees, maybe she should direct her frustration at them rather than Britain.

WidowWadman, do you have a link? I heard neo Nazis groups were going there.

Oh dear! Many many links re Far left group No Borders, whipping the Migrants to rioting giving them walkie talkies, chain saws and the like...

And Yet You Repeatedly denied all knowledge of Migrants rioting, forcing through fences etc, and the Far Left group behind them.

you have ignored so many links, articles, wonderful posts.

But this ^^ this has finally piqued you has it? Now you want a link.

Widow what about the ones that fail the asylum process, what would you do with them?

Snowbells - she's British. This thread discusses British policy. Also by "you" I meant not just "you" but everyone who keeps attacking her.

WidowWadman

'Onewing so should only those who are born here have a right to an opinion on how this country is governed? I've been living here a long time, am married to a British (born) citizen and the mother of two British (born) citizens. I have passed my test and sworn allegiance to her Maj as was asked of me. But that doesn't mean I should be compelled to agree with or not criticise the government.'

Nothing could make me happier than for people who have found a home here to integrate fully and take part in politics. You have an absolute right to think and say what you please, and vote how you like. What I'm reacting to is one of your earlier posts in which you claim that all an immigrant has to do is obey the law, whereas I think that a basic level of loyalty and gratitude - not legally enforceable, of course - should lead a newcomer not to seek to transform the country that has offered them a home.

You have the freedom to do so, of course. What I'm saying is that ideally that feeling of loyalty I mention should persuade you to accept the country as it is, just as it has accepted you.

And tangerine - you also missed my point also.

The Swedish politicians were MEANT to listen to the Swedish people. The ones who put them in power. The ones who elect them. That is their job.

British politicians should listen to the British people. It's not their job to listen to migrants. They are not British citizens. If you were a non-British citizen stuck in some country somewhere and contacted the British embassy for help, you won't get much help because you're not a British subject.

Substituting that one sentence hence won't work. The migrants may complain, but - again - they CHOSE to go to Calais rather than claim asylum anywhere else. Chances are many of them won't even qualify for asylum - given that Sweden may reject 80k asylum claims... why do you think those in Calais would be any different.

Moreshabby - do you mean on first hearing or on having exhausted all appeals? I don't agree with the idea of deportation before an appeal can be logged and heard as this would expose vulnerable people to danger. I also don't agree with people being held indefinitely in detention, often for years, as is current practice.

If there is genuinely no ground for asylum and their country of origin is safe for their return, then I don't oppose deportation in principle. However if asylum is refused on the basis that the claimant can live safely in their country of home as long as they don't tell anyone they're gay, then I think they should have a right to appeal at the place where that decision is made rather than sending them back first.
Also don't agree with deporting people into countries the government deems so unsafe that they issue a travel warning. Or with deporting people who spent their childhood/formative years here, just because they hit 18.

Nor do I agree with deporting people because they don't reach an arbitrarily high earnings threshold.

And if they cant ascertain the country of origin? You know, when they pretend to come from a dangerous place but its obvious they are lying, what would you do then?

"You happily refer to protesters, whose beliefs you don't happen to share as "thugs ""

No, I did not. As I expect you well know, I was re-appropriating the language of another poster to ask them if they would have the same feelings about the people at Calais. They called the people in Sweden thugs and I used the same sentence.

I wanted to know if Clam would be similarly empathetic with the people in Calais.

But s/he hasn't answered yet so I don't know.

"You have vetoed the use of the words "immigrants & refugees""

Excuse me? Where did I do that?

Snow:'The migrants may complain, but - again - they CHOSE to go to Calais rather than claim asylum anywhere else'
You make it sound like choosing where to go on holiday. What would make you CHOOSE to live in mud and be have your children teargassed nightly by the French police? Whatever it was that made you 'choose' that, must have been even more horrendous.

Moreshabby if you can't ascertain their country of origin, there is nowhere to send them to - that's pretty obvious isn't it?

Exactly, so what do you do with them?

Personally, the right thing to do is to build decent camps in Jordan / Lebanon. The rest of the world should pay those countries for all their help and send troops to the borders to Syria to ensure safety. They should also send medical help, send or recruit teachers from within. Basically, get a proper infrastructure in place.

Global companies - instead of opening up factories in China, India or Turkey - should open some in these countries instead to create jobs.

Once the war is over, everyone can go home because it is not as far as Britain, and chances are they wouldn't be stuck between two cultures, which would make it more difficult to go back.

Twisted - that's the thing... I wouldn't have chosen to go to Britain. Plenty of other countries on the way would have been ok (and I know Europe pretty well).

SnowBells if you had close family in the UK, and nowhere else, would you not want to head for the UK too?

What if your DC were there? Or your sister? Or one of your parents? What if you felt they needed you?

What if you felt the only hope to save the life of your family back in a war zone was to get to the UK (as in the example above)? Wouldn't you try to board a ferry then?

I know I would.

I'm normally a law abiding citizen, but if I had to cross a border illegally to save the life of a family member, I'd do it without hesitation, wouldn't you?

And these aren't thought-experiment life-or-death situations. These are the reality of what people in war zones are facing.

Moreshabby if you don't have compelling evidence that they're not where they say they're from, you'll have to give them the benefit of doubt.

Tangerine, you expressed so many of my thoughts in your post, especially your fears for the future. I feel the same, but at the same time I am hopeful, because many people still have compassion and many people seem to have formed an almost worldwide community of aid and assitance in the face of governments' callous inaction. That is where my hope is and I am have some days where I feel very scared.

To all alluding to the 'no borders lot', you can sympathise with refugees without believing in 'no borders'. Also, not everyone wanting to help them or volunteering is a 'leftie.' Some people just care.

WidowWadman, that is it totally. You can love a country and love the people, but disagree with the government. Funny how some posters don't object to someone being non UK when they are agreeing with them.

SnowBells, you may know Europe pretty well, many of these refugees don't.
My experience of France had mainly been nice holidays.

Their experience is of being beaten and abused. They have already experienced more than is imaginable of violence and abuse. You may think you would be able to live safely in France, that has not been there experience.

As Wadman says, the proportion in France, wanting to get here is actually very small.

Isn't that a contradiction twisted? France is apparently brutally intolerable but most of the migrants haven't chosen to leave? Doesn't make sense.

I will put my cards on the table.

My grandfather left his country illegally in WW2, and avoided conscription into the Nazis after his country was occupied.

He travelled illegally, and settled in the UK. He joined the war effort here, and then stayed after the war.

If he had not done that I would not exist. My GF was a very moral man. He was well respected, he worked hard and paid his taxes. His DD, my DM, is a very high achiever and has contributed enormously to this country.

Should he not have left? Was he a criminal for refusing to fight for the Nazis?

I don't think so, do you?

I am not mentioning the country because I don't want to out myself!

In that case Widow we will end up taking in all of those in Calais, and the next ones who arrive and the next....... we might as well give over our country to all and sundry now.

On that sad note I'm off to bed to have nightmares of my children's and grandchildren's future.

Bill, they think that the are more likely to be safe here- often with family and able to speak the language.
I don't know which countries in reality would offer them the most hope. But I understood entirely, the reasons for the syrian man trying, as I did the sudanese man who's children and parents had been murdered, but whose wife was already here.