Why is the public directing their anger at the individual asylum seeker that arrives at the shore…

[AnotherNC12345]

… rather than the smuggling / trafficking gangs that are responsible for the journey?

I think it’s very extreme to put all of the blame and the anger at the individual that arrives, rather than the people responsible for orchestrating the whole process. These individuals are often ‘sold the dream’ and hooked in by organised crime groups who direct them to the UK. I’ve looked at sample routes from different parts of the world (screenshots may be pending) and these are complex and would need local people, as well as law enforcement, customs officers and other government officials to turn a blind eye involved in smuggling across multiple borders.

It’s no secret that these crossings likely cost a lot of money, and I think it would be safe to assume that refugees would often be in crippling debt to the OCGs who will put pressure on them to pay it back, by threatening them and their families and I would go as far as to say they could then be coerced in to further committing crimes when granted asylum in order to pay back their debt.

These OCGs are likely involved in other trafficking / crime, not just of asylum seekers but likely drugs, weapons and sex as they have the connections across those borders.

I think it’s very unlikely that an asylum seeker is sitting there looking at all the European government websites and shopping for a country with the best benefits package and approaching a trafficker with a brochure like they’re picking a Jet2 holiday. But this is the narrative that’s often put us and fuelled in the media.

I don’t think it’s unreasonable to have a better system and want to control our borders better on a whole, but this sheer anger and blame placed at the human in front of us seems very misplaced, when they were likely manipulated in to thinking they can have a better life in this particular country and not another, and the problem is way way bigger than an individual.

Would they? Why?

Because often they will be killed. That’s why they are seeking asylum, they are not safe to remain in their country.

Already asked and answered multiple
times in the thread.
the vast majority DO stay in countries like Iran and Türkiye. Some want to get further away.
They are risking their lives presumably for a reason. Maybe they don’t feel safe in France. Perhaps if you talk to the odd immigrant and get their side of a story you’ll Learn something.

Why would they not feel safe in France? I've been to Paris and I liked it there. Lovely patisseries. If I simply didn't like France as a place to live and work I wouldn't risk potential death at sea.

But I'll read up thread as you suggested.

He hated British people. He’s not British, he didn’t identify as British.

I hate quite a lot of British people, I’m still British.

You can’t identify as British, you either are (legally) or you aren’t. He was born here, he is British.

You're just having a laugh now.

Because I reckon you don't believe in Border control.

In your opinion. I’m sorry you are struggling that others don’t agree with you, it must be challenging for you.

Why do they want to get further away?

He was born in the UK. He holds a British passport.
Please, explain to me as if I was five years old: in what way(s) is he not British?

No, no - that’s just how the law works.

There is no “opinion” on Britishness, you either are legally or you’re not.

We can’t just say the ones we don’t like aren’t.

On what grounds exactly are you saying that he isn't British?

What is your evidence exactly for saying that he didn't identify as British?

And if he were to say that he does regard himself as being British, would you then consider him to be British?

Why are you patronising the pp? She is not expressing an opinion, she is talking about the law. It is irrelevant if you disagree with it.

Clinging to literal mindedness …what does it achieve.

He hated Brits, he didn’t want to be British. I understand you are clinging onto paperwork……why? What’s the point? He preferred Rwanda, no doubt. His choice.

"You also cannot claim asylum until you are on UK soil, unless you are coming from Ukraine and Hong Kong. That it is the only current programme which exists, and I'm happy about that but it means for anyone else from many countries in turmoil have to reach here before you can reach asylum seekers. There is UKRS which an existing scheme for vulnerable refugees. You have to be referred for resettlement by partners such as the UNHCR." - so why don't these men take their families and go to a safe refugee camp?

Also before Brexit we were part of the Dublin III Regulation in which the EU tried to determine which member state was responsible for examining an asylum claim. In practice states could return asylum seekers to the first “safe” EU country they entered - however since Brexit we can no longer do that. So that's another reason why we now have to take more asylum seekers." - we received more returns than we were able to deport under Dublin III.

"Finally the reason why many asylum seekers lack passports or documents is because first many countries don't provide the documentation, if you are fleeing from a dictatorship or a violent regime you can't exactly go to the passport office and say can I have one before you try and escape." - they have enough time to plan, for their families to cobble together the smuggling fee, and contact a criminal gang, so you'd assume they might just remember to grab their documents on their way out of the door, and also remember not to throw them in the Channel on their way over.

"If your facing, a girl facing FGM cannot ask the local authorities for a passport as the community is often complicit in the practice, making official documents impossible to access without flagging something." - they are not men.

"Or like in northern Mozambique last week when Al Shabbah forcibly displaced many from their homes and killed some people, children watching decapitation, displacing thousands, burning homes and committing atrocities. Families had no chance to retrieve personal documents before running for safety." - again, they are not men; we don't get thousands of women and children fleeing; they go to safe places which are close.

Most of the places these men are fleeing require citizens to carry their national ID, so it wouldn't be a stretch to assume they would not only have one, but be used to carrying it 🙄

Women and girls are not men, you heard it here first!

I don't understand what's 'clinging'. And 'hated', and speculating on what places he may have preferred. Your language is very emotional and fairly irrational.
And 'literal mindedness' – well, a more accurate term for that in this context is 'fact'.

But I'll try again to understand:

I was born in the UK.
I have a British passport.
You have no idea where my heritage is from, what I look like, what I feel about other British people, or what countries other than the UK I might 'prefer'.
Do you think I am British? If so, why? If not, why not?

"visas are not available to people who don’t have the means to support themselves in the UK." That's why they pay the people smugglers and are told to claim asylum... Ever wondered why there's been such an increase in claims ever since communication became easier? TikTok videos and advertisements for how much you can get by moving West...

My 9x great grandfather was the illegitimate son of a Scottish Baron and a black slave in Jamaica

MrsSkylerWhite that is very interesting. How did you find this out? I would have no idea how to find out who my 9x grandfather was. Did he come to UK and if so roughly what date?

Literal mindedness - how else do you identify someone’s nationality except what it ‘literally’ is?
He was literally British - I imagine more than one Brit doesn’t much like being so, but you can’t just decide you are not - you remain literally British.
It seems this person hated everyone- extreme interest in extreme violence appears to have been the main driver, with some extra misogyny thrown in perhaps - doesn’t matter anyway as he was British whether he liked it or not.
So stop inventing that he wasn’t British because he didn’t want to be - it’s vaguely possibly true he thought that, but it’s actually (literally) true he was British.
Your suggestions how people aren’t British just don’t wash. It seems like you are grabbing at anything just to avoid what you can’t quite seem to say in direct language about being ‘British’ - but then you don’t like literal stuff do you.

Many asylum seekers don’t actually have the money themselves — they borrow it. Smuggling routes often run on debt arrangements, with families or even loan sharks financing the journey. Some asylum seekers arrive already heavily indebted.

I can see you have overlooked the point.

There would be a lot more misery if we didn't have talented people from around the world holding up our NHS. See also: most of our public services. The things that define our society and values.

Waiting times are horrific because the NHS is underfunded after long-term Tory government tried to run it into the ground.

Define your society and your particular values, yes.