What would the Left call the Right, if the small boat people were white?

[Blondiebeachbabe]

I'll start by saying, I am very anti open boarders, and I am horrified that so many illegal immigrants are arriving every day. But for me, it has absolutely nothing to do with skin colour, it is more to do with :

ONE) They have no documentation, and we have no idea if they have criminal backgrounds

TWO) They tend to come from cultures where women are not respected

THREE) They often come from places where rape is not a crime

FOUR) They cannot work, and it is costing Millions to house, feed and clothe them

FIVE) We are granting asylum to some people who should never get it - like the Hamas bodyguard we heard of yesterday

Lots of valid reasons I feel, however, for me, it has nothing to do with skin colour. If I had to be locked in a room overnight with a white man from a backward culture, or a black man from the UK, I would choose the latter, every single time.

It isn't colour, it's culture

But I see that people on the Far Left just scream "Racist" to anyone who opposes illegal immigration. What would they scream, if all the small boats were full of white men? And would people still march for England?

Thank you. I presume similar data for the UK are not made available to the public then.

And? Does that mean "they're all terrorists", or "they're all rapists?'"

It means you got it wrong about people in power not fleeing.

To make things fairer, we could charge the Afghans the same visa fees and health surcharges the Hong Kongers had to pay when they first applied:

You and your family members will each need to pay a visa application fee.
It costs:

• £206 if you’re applying for 2 years and 6 months
• £285 if you’re applying for 5 years

You and your family members will each need to pay the healthcare surcharge.
This is so you can use the National Health Service (NHS) in the UK. You’ll still need to pay for some NHS care such as prescriptions, dental care and eye tests.

For each adult (18 or older) it costs:

• £2,587.50 if you’re staying for 2 years and 6 months
• £5,175 if you’re staying for 5 years

For each child (under 18), it costs:

• £1,940 if you’re staying for 2 years and 6 months
• £3,880 if you’re staying for 5 years

You pay the healthcare surcharge as part of your online visa application.

When you apply for the first time, you’ll need to show you have enough money to pay for your housing and to support yourself and your family for 6 months.

https://www.gov.uk/british-national-overseas-bno-visa/how-much-it-costs

More potential terrorists, murderers, rapists and 'lone wolves' are within us already. An isolated case does not make a truth. You can find a case of absolutely anything.

I hope you take some deep breaths in between moving those goalposts. It is a strenuous job.

Sorry that post was meant to quote @EasternStandard

Your funnily enough.. line about power doesn’t hold. How can their backgrounds be checked?

Their backgrounds can't be checked. They could be anyone.

Mu point is, that anyone from anywhere is just as likely to be a potential sex offender.

A random British man going abroad now is no more or no less likely to sexually offend than a man arriving via a boat from Afghanistan, or an Afghan business man, or an Afghan student.

Facts don't mean much to you do they?

Indeed, it isn't unsophisticated to post facts, but that isn't what you did.

Your arguments aren't even consistent Your earlier post seemed to focus simply on numbers and on the impact which you perceive those numbers to have on the UK, but then you point to Australia as a model, which currently has a much higher rate of net migration per head of the population than the UK.

And yes, it's true that Australia doesn't grant asylum to irregular arrivals - they take far more refugees through safe and legal routes. I would love to see the UK doing the same. But that's a separate argument from the volumes issue which you referenced in your earlier post.

Ukrainians have been granted temporary protection with the expectation that the majority will eventually return home. Their visas are time-limited and do not offer a direct route to permanent settlement or indefinite leave to remain, time spent on the temporary protection visas do not count towards permanent settlement/indefinite leave to remain either. The majority of Ukrainian refugees are not young, single men.

There are limited data sources as the stats are only just being recorded, however this may help you:
https://migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources/briefings/migrants-and-crime-in-the-uk/

Also, look at Refuge, Women's Aid, ONS, pretty much every police force and they all agree that in most instances (the high 90 percent) violence against women is perpetrated by someone known to the victim. Often their partner or a relative.

I don't see Tommy Robinson and co marching about all the rapes British men commit abroad - there are no doubt thousands just today.

Think of all the sex tourists, date rapists, business men, tourists or students raping or exploiting prostitutes abroad.

I don't see Farage up in arms about Epstein? Or other 'high level' grooming gangs which traffic women in plain sight every day of the week.

I don't see Farage and TR marching about women being trafficked for prostitution.

They are only bothered about women when it can be used to serve their racist, xenophobic, divisive propaganda campaign.

I’m surprised at the agreement re Australian from others below, usually it’s the opposite.

I’m with you though, adopt their system. It’ll take the hardline approach to work however. If people vote for that then great.

Most people think rape by Western and European men is bad as well.

Only on MN do you see "but white men do it tooooooo"

But even they keep going back to Ukraine for holidays and dental treatment. If someone goes back they shouldn't be allowed back in as obviously safe enough to go there

If there were any credible stats about Pakistani or Afghan men being more prolific, on average, for sexual offences IN THE UK, then posters on here would be all over it.

Data sets from Sweden etc are largely irrelevant because it's a different society and different demographics. The UK is a much larger population, with far more social and economic inequality and multiculturalism is far more deeply entrenched. Also, for every study supposedly proving 'x,' there will be ten other studies claiming to prove the exact opposite, or a different variation.

Single studies from other countries are essentially meaningless. We could all google 'find me a study to prove x,y,z' now.

The 'Fact' is that there is no overwhelming evidence that any race of people are more predisposed to being rapists than any other. Individual studies or newspaper articles are not empirical truths. They are... individual studies, and you need to compare and contrast a wide spectrum of studies to establish anything approximating to 'fact.'

The fact is, nobody knows.

Exactly👏

Especially women. Why gaslight other women into saying they are racist rather than be an advocate against all rapists. It's just virtuous point scoring by women far from being interested in addressing a common problem.

So you think Robinson, Thomas, Farage and Lowe have women's interests at heart? I think you might be rather naive.

Are they all rapists?

Essentially the whole immigration debate has been hijacked by deeply unpleasant people on both sides and it’s impossible to have anything resembling a sensible or reasoned debate about it.

The combined effort to avoid answering the question is rather disappointing but maybe not surprising.