 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Problems at Calais. Why?
|
|
|
Subject: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: GUEST,Kampervan Date: 20 Aug 15 - 01:25 PM OK, I'm starting this thread because I want to understand what is happening at Calais. I understand that thousands of people have sought refuge in Europe because of persecution, war and the appalling conditions in their home countries. The fact that they put themselves and their families into personal danger surely demonstrates how strong is their need to find refuge. But what I don't understand is why, having reached the 'relative' safety of Europe, so many of them make their way to Calais and put their lives at risk again trying to get to the UK. Now I believe that the UK is morally obliged to help re-settle our fair share of the refugees who arrive in Europe, but why the almost suicidal drive on the part of some refugees to get across the channel? As I understand it, if someone is granted refugee status in any European country and then subsequently acquires citizenship, they can legitimately move the UK whenever they like. As I say, I believe that all civilised countries should help re-settle refugees, we have a history of doing this in the UK and long may it continue. Why can't it all be managed without the need for 'The Jungle' and for all the unpleasantness that accompanies it? Can anyone enlighten me? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: GUEST Date: 20 Aug 15 - 02:41 PM Englanders are more likely to hire undocumented workers. Englanders may pay sub-standard wages, however it is far more than hopeless. Englanders like the luxery of a servant class. Englanders homes were designed with servant quarters in mind. Englanders are most likely to have beer sotted bobbys. '...................... OR Calis is a media joke...perpetuated by media moguls in America...to take the focus of the media hype off the presidential front runner Trump and "the Trump Wall" streching from Vancouver Canada to Nova Scotia with his name emblazoned in gold-leaf every 400 meters. ............. OR It really, REALLY, sux to be a black, living with other blacks. OR ................. Anchor babies work in more than California. .................. OR Most people can not instictively swim so a land crossing is easier. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: GUEST,Musket Date: 20 Aug 15 - 02:46 PM Err.. Keep banging the rocks together.. Good job the Atlantic is bigger than the channel. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: GUEST,Kampervan Date: 20 Aug 15 - 03:29 PM I thought that it might be a waste of time asking a serious question and hoping for an informative answer, but I tried. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: Greg F. Date: 20 Aug 15 - 03:35 PM Sorry, Kamper - the troglodites are coming out of the woodwork, bearing rocks, as per ususal. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: GUEST Date: 20 Aug 15 - 04:44 PM How many of them are economic migrants who would not qualify for refugee status or asylum? Think of the ones who could not afford to get to Calais. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: GUEST,Musket Date: 20 Aug 15 - 06:34 PM Whilst you wouldn't believe it listening to the rabid dogs and their apologists, The UK has a reputation for fair play, civilised compassionate citizens and statesman like government. Not that the savage media and their ministerial poodles care about such things.. Perhaps another factor is that the second language of most of these people is English, so a head start in society from their perspective. All I know is that the first "guest" on this thread has problems thinking beyond their own insignificant country, far away and neither relevant nor important to this debate. No matter, should they ever become important, they'll turn up late again, just in time to claim the credit eh? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: GUEST,Musket Date: 21 Aug 15 - 02:36 AM Thinking on, the idea of becoming an EU citizen at first port of entry then just coming here as an EU citizen? Actually, I reckon that's a good point although I do think residency visas rather than citizenship are what tend to be offered. I have a friend, a doctor colleague, who holidays in Switzerland with his family as his work visa (he is Iraqi) precludes travel into other EU countries. Granted, he isn't a refugee by status although as a Christian he was persecuted in many ways under Saddam. But like Reginald D Hunter, Clive James, Boris Johnson, Nick Cave and anybody resident in The UK who was born elsewhere, he is I suppose an economic migrant. One of my fellow Muskets has a "green card" right of residency in The USA. If he ever took it up, he too would be an economic migrant. I come from a village near Barnsley but live in London due to my job. I am an economic migrant for that matter. It's about time dangerous rhetoric was put in its place, people traffickers taken off the streets and rues, politicians looked at the issues not the grandstanding and the media stick to checking out cellulite on celebrities. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: GUEST,20 Aug 15 - 04:44 PM Date: 21 Aug 15 - 03:39 AM I made the suggestion that they may be were mainly economic migrants because the OP seemed to assume that they were all refugees. If they have been able to afford to get to Calais they are not the ones suffering most in the "apalling conditions in their home countries". Don't just think of the Eritrean who could find the dollars to get to Calais. Think one the one who is stuck at home as child conscript or the child with no money who ran the risk of being shot crossing the border to a camp in Ethiopia before they reached the age for conscription and is stuck there pennyless. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: GUEST,Kampervan Date: 21 Aug 15 - 04:05 AM A fair point Guest. I have no idea as to how many of them finance their trip or how many are truly fleeing persecution or how many just fancy life in a western country. Nor am I sure whether it really matters. If someone wants to get into a country that badly,then maybe they would make a great contribution towards that country when they got in. I'm not stating my beliefs here, because I don't know what to believe. I just get the feeling that Musket is right and we should get a lot more facts before making judgements. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: GUEST,20 Aug 15 - 04:44 PM Date: 21 Aug 15 - 04:24 AM Yes Kampervan, it was me who said on the previous discussion that they were probably very resourceful people. However, so are the ones who get a training (as a nurse maybe) and then take the legal route to the UK. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: GUEST,Dave Date: 21 Aug 15 - 07:34 AM I think it is because many of the economic migrants have English as a second language, far fewer French or Italian. Of course some have German, but then far more of the migrants go to Germany anyway. Its also because Osbourne's lie that the UK economy is on the up compared with France has gained some traction. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: Backwoodsman Date: 21 Aug 15 - 08:43 AM This puts a little perspective on the issue of asylum-seekers, and the perceived situation in Calais (and perhaps elsewhere?). |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 21 Aug 15 - 09:26 AM Where will they live? From another Guardian piece, "If there is one thing that revolutionary communists and bankers can agree on, it is that there is a housing crisis in Britain. There are too few homes, usually costing too much, often in the wrong places, and often of poor quality. The crisis damages lives, breaks up families, blights employment prospects, reduces mobility and slows the economy." "The housing crisis is an accelerating human disaster. It is creating exploitative landlords, overcrowding and poor-quality homes. Private renters spend 40% of their income on housing. It is shocking that many people in their 20s now regard it as an accepted fact that they will never have much by way of a home." "The most obvious cause of Britain's housing is the simple operation of supply and demand. The country's population is increasing, and we like to live in smaller units than in the past. A figure of about 240,000 is consistently estimated as the amount of new homes Britain needs each year, and with equal consistency it is never achieved. In 2014, fewer than 120,000 were built." http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/mar/14/britain-housing-crisis-10-ways-solve-rowan-moore-general-election |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: Raedwulf Date: 21 Aug 15 - 09:40 AM It's a complicated question. Muddied not only by the ghastly self-interested, rock-banging, muck-racking British press (still British even if much can blamed on The Bouncing Czech Maxwell, and the Aussie Murdoch), but also by the likes of Musket, who thinks anyone that doesn't mindlessly agree with him is Wrong. As it stands as the moment, the vast majority of illegal migrants are from northern Africa, mostly from those states disrupted by internal strife. The Calais "problem" is seriously overdone by the UK press. I believe for two reasons. One, it's easy to stir up Little Englanders; two, it's an easy point to focus on since it is THE point of contact between the UK & Europe. The media in this country, sadly, are all about bums on seats, footfall, copy sold, call it how you will. If journalism were an athletic sport, Truth would not make the 100m Final! If you see what I mean... The fact is that the majority of illegal immigrants do not seek entry to the UK. They never have. The rest of Europe has, over the past few decades, absorbed far more legal immigrants, asylum seekers, and illegal immigrants than the UK has. The right of centre opinion in this country will never acknowledge this, even if it actually accepts it. There is a lot more that could be said, but I've been on Mudcat for more than a decade. What I've already said will be argued with, if not dismissed as nonsense, so I shan't waste my time. However, my personal view is this - I have no problem whatsoever with legal immigration. There are many communities who, whatever they take out (e.g. sending money back home), contribute at least as much, if not more. Many of them have been willing to die for us (& for their own cause too, be it noted). Look at the contribution of the likes of the Poles & Czechs in WWII, for example. Illegal immigration is another matter, but I'm no more than ambivalent, because I know it is a very complicated issue. Many of them are no more than economic migrants; not refugees, not deserving of asylum. Many of them are both of the latter, desperate to the point of repeatedly risking their lives. Were I in their place I would likely do / be the same. I am lucky, because I am not in their place. My reservation is that someone who is willing to break our laws to get in, how likely are they to follow them once they are in? How will they contribute positively? There was a case reported on the BBC as recently as a week ago. Illegal immigrant posing as a lawyer, with a history of violence. Also has, for reasons unspecified, indefinite leave to remain. Convicted, but we presumably won't chuck him out after release. Is that the sort of person anyone wants in their country? He is, of course, not representative. One man out of thousands does not define the rest. But if you look at things rationally, you can't but wonder whether those willing to break laws to get in, who then must feel compelled to "disappear", are going to make any country a better place. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: akenaton Date: 21 Aug 15 - 04:18 PM Good post for an Englishman Raedwulf, only one slight quibble, why did you contrast UK immigration rates with the WHOLE of Europe? Or did you mean each individual country in Europe? :0( |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: Raedwulf Date: 22 Aug 15 - 09:36 AM "Rest of Europe" was perhaps a bit generic, Ake. But Germany has been absorbing more immigrants, of one sort or another, than the UK for years. So have the Scand's. English may be THE international language, but an awful lot of African countries (which is where the bulk of the migrants have been coming from for a long time) have French as a first or second language. So why would they want to come here? Very many of them don't. As Musket suggested, the UK may still have a reputation for fair play, civilised compassionate citizens and statesman like government. But that doesn't necessarily make us the preferred destination, especially when the English Channel remains a hindrance! I'm not about to go hunting for specific figures. However, I've seen enough reports over the years that have included them. The UK is not bottom of the list either by numbers accepted, or by numbers per head of population. Neither are we anywhere the top. Which is not the impression I am left with from what comes out of most of the UK media. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: GUEST,Musket Date: 22 Aug 15 - 09:43 AM Odd thing you said about me Raedwolf? Try reading my fucking posts before displaying your gormless ignorance for a change. Anybody who disagrees with he has a view. I have a view. They have a view. What you should be asking is whether they borrowed a view. Prat. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 22 Aug 15 - 09:44 AM The UK is not bottom of the list either by numbers accepted, or by numbers per head of population. Neither are we anywhere the top. We would rate highly in numbers per metre of undeveloped land, and would be unbeatable in numbers per available house. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: Greg F. Date: 22 Aug 15 - 09:51 AM What about number per cubic metres of breathable air? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 22 Aug 15 - 10:30 AM That would not work Greg. All countries have equal access to all the world's air. Drinking water is an issue in some places. England's SE for instance. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: akenaton Date: 22 Aug 15 - 10:53 AM yes that's what I meant when I questioned Raedwulf, we simply don't have much space or infrastructure to cope with unregulated EU economic migrants. Regarding refugees, there don't seem to be many who are fleeing from persecution, so why are they coming here rather than staying in continental Europe.....better job prospects higher benefits? Our interventions in the Middle East and North Africa in support of "freedom and democracy" caused much of the mayhem, so I suppose we are obliged to pick up the pieces. Firstly I would hang the whole Labour war cabinet....THEN I would hang, draw and quarter Mr Hague and Mr Cameron The fate of Mrs HtH Clinton must be decided by the American people. Maybe they will elect her President? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: GUEST,Musket Date: 22 Aug 15 - 12:38 PM "There don't seem to be many who are fleeing from persecution." Beggars belief. Just when you thought it couldn't sink any lower, as well. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: GUEST,Dave Date: 22 Aug 15 - 02:42 PM Get with the programme Keith, air is the next thing to be privatised. We will be charged by the breath. Its going to be hard to work our where it comes from, so the charge will be levied where it is used. No breathing if you are behind with your bills. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: GUEST,Kampervan Date: 22 Aug 15 - 04:18 PM Akenaton - how do you personally work out exactly how many are fleeing persecution and which ones just see it as a step up the wealth ladder? To me, most of them look pretty desperate,and I certainly wouldn't set myself up as being capable of differentiating. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: akenaton Date: 22 Aug 15 - 06:04 PM Well Kampervan, if it was simply safety they were looking for, why continue on the arduous journey to the UK? I'm sure they would be just as safe anywhere in continental Europe. Some of the people were interviewed for BBC tv they said quite openly that it was for a better lifestyle. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: Musket Date: 23 Aug 15 - 03:42 AM Oh well, if The BBC managed to find people stating the obvious... Luckily, most people are intelligent enough to factor in such interviews rand take such comments in context rather than pounce on them to feed their own shallow bigotry. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: GUEST,Kampervan Date: 23 Aug 15 - 03:49 AM and most of them do stay in mainland Europe, we're hardly taking our fair share of all those who flee to Europe. Or do you think they should all stay in Italy and Greece where they land? After all those two countries are easily able to cope aren't they? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: akenaton Date: 23 Aug 15 - 04:20 AM I think the problem is determining if they are actually refugees. As Raedwulf has sais they seem to have enough money to travel, the real persecuted people are those still sitting in Syria and other countries that we have helped to de-stabilise. The alternative I suppose is to just open the doors to everyone, as we have been forced to do within Europe, due to our membership of the EU. Italy and Greece cannot cope with more refugees, but we already have 250,000 economic migrants per year, coming from Eastern Europe, so an open door policy on all entrants would be catastrophic. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: GUEST Date: 23 Aug 15 - 05:17 AM Nice reference with facts Backwoodsman. Thank You. A quick three minute visual of the situation. Calais Chaos It certainly resembles the Tiajuana border with Mexico. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: GUEST,Musket Date: 23 Aug 15 - 07:29 AM Calais is the place we know about because it affects us. There are many places where the human tragedy of regimes have a catastrophic effect. I wanted to take Mrs Musket to Kos next month, being where I popped the question as it were, ten years ago. The truly horrendous and sad situation there, the human tragedy that many on here, together with their soul mates in The Tory party think are chancers trying to get a better deal in life rather than fleeing poverty, war and victimisation is too harrowing for such a romantic plan. Taking her to Cyprus and hoping she doesn't notice the difference. (Of course she will. Many doctors make a bit of a pilgrimage to Kos, the home of Hippocrates. That's really why we were there in the first place.) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: Raedwulf Date: 23 Aug 15 - 09:57 AM Musket (presuming this is actually Ian Mather that I'm replying to)- there's nothing odd regarding what I said about you. I've read too many of your fucking posts. You regularly sneer, smear, and ad hominem. You're supposed to have a brain. Or you like to remind us you're a doctor of some description with a degree or three, which is presumably the same thing. I may well be a prat, but with occasional exceptions (you being one), I try to get my point across rather than resorting to your methods. If I treat you with contempt, it's because you usually behave contemptibly. Along with one or two other posters here. Unlike them, you could make your points. But you prefer to make a bigger prat of yourself than I ever have. As I pointed out in the thread that was recently closed, are people here to get their point across, or simply to listen to themselves? All too often, you sound to me like the latter. I suspect it isn't only me that thinks that. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: GUEST Date: 24 Aug 15 - 07:56 AM British army should be sent over to hose them, drench the bastards with paint or ink, why are the French allowing them to camp there ? A load of free loaders looking into the UK and seeing us as a soft touch. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: Jim Carroll Date: 24 Aug 15 - 02:38 PM "British army should be sent over to hose them, drench the bastards with paint or ink" Great idea - why not Just shoot one in ten of them; that'd soon put a stop too their "freeloading"!!! Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: GUEST Date: 24 Aug 15 - 10:28 PM 3,000 rescued by the Italian navy this past weekend. I believe the attraction of England is the Sgengen agreement...It is certainly hobbleing me. After summer break....winter holidays in the Netherland will not happen. As noted on a travel advisory: Anyone travelling temporarily to a Schengen area from a country that is subject to visa requirements, be it an individual or group visitors, tourists, or business travelers is required to purchase travel insurance that covers the number of days he/she will be spending in the Schengen Area. The insurance must be valid throughout the territory of the Member States and cover the entire period of the person's intended stay or transit. The minimum coverage must be EUR 30,000! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: Backwoodsman Date: 25 Aug 15 - 02:07 AM Any ordinary international traveller (i.e. Who isn't extremely wealthy) with at least two working brain-cells buys travel insurance, either trip-by-trip or whole-year basis. If you can't afford travel insurance, I'd seriously question whether you can afford the travel. You certainly can't afford the risks. I was talking to someone only yesterday, whose son died suddenly in Spain. It cost GBP 15,000 to have his body repatriated to the UK. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: GUEST,JTT Date: 25 Aug 15 - 02:20 AM Some posters are conflating the refugees coming across the Mediterranean with the people at Calais. In the Mediterranean, the people being rescued by Italian and Irish ships (but oddly I haven't heard of any British?) are mostly from Syria and Libya, with some from Somalia and other African countries. They're almost all people fleeing wars, mostly the wars currently being caused by IS/ISIS/Daish. In Calais, the people trying to get to Britain are mostly 'economic migrants' - which is to say people looking for work. As I understand it, it's easier to find work in Britain than elsewhere in Europe, perhaps because the black economy is less regulated there. I can't understand the rage and contempt for people seeking work, but perhaps a lot of English people read the newspapers that are whipping up hatred against foreigners. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: GUEST,Musket Date: 25 Aug 15 - 02:31 AM Yeah that's me Raedwulf. Out of interest, and used in any threads where medical issues come up (two people on here like to distort certain medical statistics to vilify section of society) the other two Muskets are actually doctors although McMusket is of the academia type rather than face patients these days. It's my later in life interfering in healthcare that got us all recognising each other at folk clubs. I'm thick as pigshit and proud, if that's a credibility test around here. Never went to 'uni as such and only got off my arse in my late '30s to research the testical side of my industry to a doctoral thesis, the entry having been my dissertation to charter as an engineer. You see, you are as guilty as any of the actually nasty ones in that respect. Dragging up irrelevant aspects of people that you glean from elsewhere. There are many people on Mudcat who can give an informed perspective to any debate but to do so give their credentials. Not easy when ignorance is put forward as a virtue and the shoulder chip lightly fried and sprinkled with salt and vinegar. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: Jim Carroll Date: 25 Aug 15 - 03:02 AM ".winter holidays in the Netherland will not happen." What a shame - holidays being spoiled by all those freeloaders drowning themselves to feed their families - it's a disgrace!!! Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 25 Aug 15 - 03:28 AM Italian and Irish ships (but oddly I haven't heard of any British?) The biggest ship in the RN has been operating in the Med. and has rescued thousands. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: Raggytash Date: 25 Aug 15 - 03:41 AM I think the Professor is referring to HMS Bulwark |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 25 Aug 15 - 03:47 AM Yes Rag. Thank you. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: Raedwulf Date: 30 Aug 15 - 11:12 AM Ake - the arduous & expensive part of the illegal immigration process is breaking the Schengen borders. You read but, seemingly, you don't read quite enough. Or you don't comprehend what you read. "As Raedwulf has sais they seem to have enough money to travel, the real persecuted people are those still sitting in Syria and other countries that we have helped to de-stabilise." Not what I said at all. I said many of them are economic migrants. That doesn't mean they've got any money! It means they'll go to desperate lengths to come to Europe to do ANYTHING they can because they will (or, more to the point, the BELIEVE they will) be able to make a far better living than in their own countries. Including borrowing & mortgaging everything that their (extended) family has. As far as I can tell, from strictly anecdotal evidence, they will (usually) work endless hours for little money & send home every penny they don't have to spend keeping together body & soul. Rather more laudable than all our alleged social security scroungers, no? The key thing is to get inside the EU borders. After that, you can pick & choose, because there's barely a check on your documents. The target isn't "immigrate to Britain / Sweden / Wherever. It's "get inside Schengen; now I can travel more freely." In one sense, the traditional asylum law ("apply to the first safe country you come to") is being made a mockery. In another, it's simply a bad law in the modern world; one that badly needs updating... And how do you tell an economic migrant from a genuine persecuted refugee? Fucked if I know... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: akenaton Date: 30 Aug 15 - 11:55 AM Just remove ourselves from the EU. The fact that we have been instrumental in destabilising the Middle East and North Africa cannot be ignored though and persecuted refugees are in a large part OUR problem. If we control OUR borders, then we can at least make a decision on the validity of asylum claims |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: GUEST Date: 30 Aug 15 - 12:07 PM Why don't the Brits have a BIG ship? ? ? Something like an aircraft carrier? ? ? For a country who sings: Britania rule the seas... "Rather pathetic" ....as Alfred Hitchcock used to say. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: GUEST,Kampervan Date: 30 Aug 15 - 12:21 PM Given the generally very high standards of trolling on Mudcat, that last attempt by 'Guest' was pathetic in the extreme. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: Jim Carroll Date: 30 Aug 15 - 12:28 PM "For a country who sings: Britania rule the seas..." Waves - rhymes with "Slaves". As you say, bit pathetic, as Pagliacci sings - he was a clown as well. Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: Backwoodsman Date: 30 Aug 15 - 03:33 PM Can't spell 'Britannia' either. FAIL!! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: Dave the Gnome Date: 31 Aug 15 - 06:53 AM To address the opening question I would say that a big problem is the demonisation of migrants by the press, politicians and, sadly, some of the people on here. Take away the word 'migrant', substitute it with human being and re-read the news stories to fully understand the situation. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 31 Aug 15 - 07:09 AM If all that was done, the "probelms at Calais" would not go away. You did not, "address the opening question." Of course migrants should not be "demonised." Who but trolls have done so here? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: Dave the Gnome Date: 31 Aug 15 - 07:20 AM The opening question asks why there were problems at Calais. Problems at Calais. Why? Not what to do to make it go away. I answered that opening question with a suggestion as to what I believe to be a (note: not 'the') problem. I don't know what to do to make it go away any more than I know what to do to make anyone on here go away. Other than have a few pints of real ale of course. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: Jim Carroll Date: 31 Aug 15 - 07:52 AM It's not a problem confined to Calais - it's a problem to do with what's happening in the world today. Dave's suggestion in regarding those affected by those people effected would be a bloody-good start - doesn't seem to have occurred to some people. I see from this morning's paper that that nice Tory Blair is being questioned on why he made secret attempts to protect that equally nice Mr Qdaffi when Libya was under attack - it has already been established that Britain was training that even nicer son of the nice Mr Qdaffi to take over where his father left off. While Britain supports dictators and continues to sell them arms to suppress their people, the flow of refugees will continue - night always follows day. Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 31 Aug 15 - 08:45 AM Dave's suggestion in regarding those affected by those people effected would be a bloody-good start - doesn't seem to have occurred to some people I agree, but it is not an issue here, except from the troll. Why the problem? It is part of the wider migration crisis. Why that? Poverty, but there has always been poverty. War, but that is not new either. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: Jim Carroll Date: 31 Aug 15 - 09:17 AM "I agree, but it is not an issue here, except from the troll" It has been an issue from the start - the people who have made this unbeliveably dangerous journey have been regarded as 'a problem' and nothing else - by the press, by the border officials and by inhuman rat-bags like Cameron. Ironically, the only nation to have shown true, practical sympathy for them and their plight is Germany - it is the Merkin Mob who have insisted that they are in trouble and need practical help. Meanwhile - back at the ranch, the Cameron Crew continue selling weapons to dictators and even give military assistance to monsters like Assad - who is driving out Syrian people in their thousands. It is very much an issue Why has there always been poverty? That's part of our legacy to our ex-colonies, which continues with our buying our cheap shirts and shoes from companies which are supplied from countries paying slave wages in lethal places of work. Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: GUEST, ^*^ Date: 31 Aug 15 - 10:11 AM Unsafe travel and shelter for refugees is a problem in a lot of places right now. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: bubblyrat Date: 31 Aug 15 - 10:27 AM My understanding is that Great Britain is OUTSIDE the Schengen Agreement zone, and therefore is not bound by its terms in any way shape or form.Furthermore, I understand that most if not all immigrants DESTROY all their identity documents, passports,etc, in order to enhance and reinforce their refugee status.This is most unhelpful. Additionally, Britain enjoys a reputation for being a "promised land" of milk & honey , where EVERYONE is fabulously wealthy and lives an unimaginably easy and carefree existence.Of course,nothing could be further from the truth, but still one cannot disabuse most foreigners of their beliefs in this regard. I was, about 4 years ago , living in Henley-On-Thames ; I was being pursued for money owed to my bank (about 8K ) and was 'phoned by a foreign-sounding lady from a debt-collection agency.I told her that I didn't possess eight HUNDRED pounds,let alone 8 THOUSAND, but she REFUSED to believe me, BECAUSE I LIVED IN HENLEY !! ( and I therefore had a big car,a boat,servants,private 'plane, etc, ad nauseam ). In any case, this is a small, overcrowded country with a crumbling infrastructure ,slow trains,pothole-infested roads etc , that cannot realistically bear the additional burden of unrestricted immigration by people who cannot even IDENTIFY themselves ; sorry, but that's the sad truth. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: Greg F. Date: 31 Aug 15 - 10:33 AM If all that was done, the "probelms at Calais" would not go away. More to the point, YOU wouldn't go away, either. What do "The Historians" say about this issue? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: GUEST,Raggytash Date: 31 Aug 15 - 10:49 AM I would think that migration has become more widespread because of a greater access to information. A hundred years ago many people living in the Middle East or Africa may not have even heard of France, Germany or England. They may have had an aspiration to have a better life but the knowledge that one was possible elsewhere was not available. In what they seek they are no different to the rest of us, a decent living, a decent home, a standard of freedom. Is it really asking too much. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 31 Aug 15 - 11:08 AM In what they seek they are no different to the rest of us, a decent living, a decent home, a standard of freedom. Is it really asking too much. There are literally billions of people in Africa and Asia who do not have those things. Finding a way to provide them is actually a very big ask. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: GUEST,Raggytash Date: 31 Aug 15 - 11:14 AM I would not suggest it is an easy thing, it certainly is a big ask. But unless the "western world" addresses the various issues in a positive manner migration will continue. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: Jim Carroll Date: 31 Aug 15 - 01:13 PM "it certainly is a big ask" Lots and lots of post colonialist patronising going on here - big ask - my arse. These people are asking support from countries that are largely responsible for what has made them refugees - the very first "favour" that needs to be granted if that the democratic (sic) West should stop arming and supporting the animals that are creating these tragedies - very far from being even discussed, let alone granted. We owe these many of these people for the state we left their countries in after centuries of milking them dry. Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: akenaton Date: 31 Aug 15 - 01:29 PM In Libya, we were supposed to be freeing them from a tyrant. We were trying to make their country A democratic egalitarian paradise You "liberals" couldn't wait to be rid of Gaddafi, Assad etc. See what you've got now? Head chopping maniacs, obscene violence, societies in ruins. It's the ISIS Show and it will be opening here shortly. "liberals" are not just a danger to socialism, they are a threat to the whole world. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: MGM·Lion Date: 31 Aug 15 - 01:58 PM "We owe these many of these people for the state we left their countries in after centuries of milking them dry." ,..,., My late wife & I worked in the University of Sierra Leone in Freetown for a while, 1991-92 I think it was. Speaking quietly, 1 to 1, with SL-ean university colleagues, we found not one who didn't regret the British having left, and just wished there was some way to get us/them back -- no doubt, to hear good ole Jim tell it, so that we could 'milk them' a bit drier. The successors to European rule in sub-Saharan Africa have ruined the efficient states that should have been left behind, and its nothing but doctrinaire parti-pris to claim otherwise. ≈M≈ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: Vashta Nerada Date: 31 Aug 15 - 02:28 PM Bullshit about "liberals." This liberal knew it was better to neuter Gaddafi and leave him in place. It was Dick Cheney who told Baby Bush he could outdo his father and remove Saddam in Iraq and bad advice that had Obama take out Gaddafi. Spread the wealth when it comes to bad advice. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: Greg F. Date: 31 Aug 15 - 02:43 PM The successors to European rule in sub-Saharan Africa have ruined the efficient states that should have been left behind So the hell with self government. Haven't heard anyone resort to "The White Man's Burden" justification in a long time. The Third Reich was also a model of efficiency. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: Raedwulf Date: 31 Aug 15 - 02:51 PM Bubbly - I'm not absolutely certain (it's complicated), but I think your opinion is somewhat flawed. We have an opt-out. Which is not to say that we have opted out. I'm not clear on where we stand, and it probably depends on whether Labs or Tories hold power. We may not be "bound" but, I think, we are "party" to it. After that, I simply don't recognise the country you are describing. Especially the last para. Our trains aren't especially slow (except that people are impatient to get everywhere faster), our roads aren't especially pot-holed (no more than they have been for the last 30 years), and so on. Above all, as I have already pointed out, we are NOT the destination of choice for most migrants (as I understand, anyway). And, a lot of the time, the migrants don't destroy their documents - the TRAFFICKERS do! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: Jim Carroll Date: 31 Aug 15 - 03:50 PM " we found not one who didn't regret the British having left, and just wished there was some way to get us/them back" Nice argument for never having lost the Empire Mike - Empire Loyalism - never doubted you for a minute! Can't speak for Seirra Leone - but we are experiencing the results of the effects of Empire at present. I'd have thought that, if nothing else, two W£orld Wars were a strong enough argument against Imperialism. Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: MGM·Lion Date: 31 Aug 15 - 03:53 PM "The Third Reich was also a model of efficiency" .,,.,. Oh, well! doesn't that just prove ··· a Godwin's Law b that efficiency is detrimental to any entity - ??? Now why, I wonder, do I just occasionally feel that the poster of that effulgent observation might just not be the brightest button in the Mudcat box?! ≈M≈ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: Raedwulf Date: 31 Aug 15 - 04:06 PM And crap like that (whether I agree with the poster or not) is one of the main reasons I fell out of the Mudcat habit. Why the fuck can't you lot debate a point without automatically slanging each other? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: MGM·Lion Date: 31 Aug 15 - 04:09 PM "Can't speak for Seirra Leone" .,,. No, indeed you can't Jim. But our academic colleagues could. And did. So why not just pay them the compliment of listening to them for a change, Jim, instead of knowing their own biznis better than they did becoz you lot over there know it all by nacher... Oh, wotz da use! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: MGM·Lion Date: 31 Aug 15 - 04:11 PM And why, Raedwulf, can't you make a point without 'fucks' & 'craps'? Pathetic! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: Raedwulf Date: 31 Aug 15 - 05:24 PM And would you get the point if I did, MGM? No, of course you wouldn't. Like too many of the frequent posters on this forum, you'd pretend that you weren't one of the people that the remark was pointed at. Don't get prissy about a couple of less than polite words just because they're pointed in your (amongst others) direction. You're one of those I sometimes agree with, sometimes disagree with, and yes, those words *were* pointed at you (amongst others). It annoys the fuck (yes, that word again) out of me sometimes that people like you who CAN get their point across without talking crap (yes, that word again) won't do so. I may be pathetic, I may be just frustrated, but whatever I am, I suggest you reconsider your 03:53PM post. Chuck around whatever labels you like, but it was rather less clever than mine. And no, "Third Reich" wasn't exactly intelligent either. There's too many intelligent & decent folk on here who can't manage to rein in their emotions enough to see past labels & actually LISTEN to each other. That's one of the few things in the world that really pisses me off... :-/ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: Greg F. Date: 31 Aug 15 - 05:34 PM Hey, EmGeeEm - Fuck Godwin. The analogy IS apt- apparently you have no knowledge of what Leopold did in the Congo. Or you just choose to ignore it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: GUEST,Mrzy Date: 01 Sep 15 - 03:24 AM Si on fait un camp de 3000 ils seront 5000 On ne s'en sortira que de deux manières En expulsant ... Difficile et inefficace En développant les pays d'où ils viennent ... Long mais en attendant Ou alors en les laissant librement partir en Angleterre |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: Jim Carroll Date: 01 Sep 15 - 03:42 AM "But our academic colleagues could." How could - or how dare any group academics or otherwise, of people speak on behalf of an entire nation - ? Sure - some people supported the Empire, some people did well under it (others came away with Stockholm Syndrome) - nobody in their right mind can claim that any nation benefited by being ruled by another, culturally or economically. Empires were based on suppression and exploitation - none more so than The British Empires. These nations made their voice known by demanding independence, and more often than not, those voices were suppressed by military force until they became so loud, they had to be listened to. The detrimental effects of empire are written into the history books - ten million dead Congolese and countless maimings in the pursuit of rubber for 'Gallant Little Belgium, one million dead and an equal number forced to emigrate (and a legacy of an economy based on permanent immigration) in Ireland, Palestine, India/Pakistan..... and many other examples they are the scars left by Empire. It is simple robbery to take the national wealth of a country and use it to empower and enrich another, and it is gross, cultural arrogance to impose one culture on another - that is what Empire is about. The Empire idea is as dead as Capital Punishment (another of your fond memories), but its memory lingers on in the form of civil wars, national poverty and oppression brought about by what and who it left behind. When Britain pulled out of the 26 counties of Ireland, they immediately left a bloody civil war in the South and nearly a century of violence and cultural, political and economic inequality in the six counties they hung on to. In Africa and Asia, they left similar examples of bloodshed, and economies based on near slavery exploitation which still fills British shops like Primark with sweat-labour produced cheap goods. We have spent a long time here recording people, not just singing, but talking about their lives under the period following British rule - in this area in particular, though most have a fondness of and respect for the British people, there is virtually none for the good old days of British rule, only memories of The Black and Tans, or the Rineen ambush, or the sacking of Miltown Malbay, Lahinch and Ennistymon, or the Famine memories - that is their fondness for Empire, whatever your Sierra Leonese academic friends might have told you. JIm Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: MGM·Lion Date: 01 Sep 15 - 04:12 AM I could ask what the Belgians in the Congo had to do with the 3rd Reich, if I thought that Greg, as the incomparable Jane Austen put it, deserved rational opposition. But as I don't, I won't. So commune with yourself, Gee Eff, and much good may it do you! Tara ≈M≈ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: MGM·Lion Date: 01 Sep 15 - 04:27 AM "would you get the point if I did [avoid obscenity], MGM?" .,,. Much better, in fact, Raed -- f's & c's & such are always a turnoff to me, inevitably distracting from whatever may be the perpetrator's actual point. I vowed 4 years ago to forswear them entirely in my own posts, in which you will nowadays never find such; and I feel my points are the better made without their aid, whatever may be the view of your fastidious self as to their efficacy. Regards ≈M≈ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: MGM·Lion Date: 01 Sep 15 - 04:42 AM Must congratulate on your last post, Jim. One of the best examples of the old "Mind made up, do not confuse with facts please" syndrome I have ever come across. Of course you know Sierra Leone's biz much better than the faculty of its national university -- coz you are Carroll·the·Infallible, innit! Teeheeheeheeheeheeheeheeheehee············ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 01 Sep 15 - 04:49 AM The Empire is long gone. The Migration crisis is new. You can not blame the Empire for every problem in the world for ever more, but Jim will. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: Jim Carroll Date: 01 Sep 15 - 05:21 AM "The Migration crisis is new." It's very much a part of the state of countries when the Empires pulled out (not just the British Empire. It is also a consequence of the continued support for despotic regimes and our continued poncing off impoverished countries by supporting virtual slave labour. We owe them - no "ask" - a debt. "Mind made up, do not confuse with facts please" Name calling again Mike - respond to the points rather than reverting to your now well-known schoolyard behaviour - yah boo, sucks to you too Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: Dave the Gnome Date: 01 Sep 15 - 07:55 AM May I suggest that those who derided my earlier comment about dehumanising people by giving them the 'migrant' label read this article. Glad it is not just me thinks this way. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: MGM·Lion Date: 01 Sep 15 - 08:07 AM Your "schoolyard behaviour" not that much removed from my "mind-made-up" as abusive rather than argumentative comment, Jim. Tho, as for "name-calling", I can't find a single 'name' of any sort in my post. So yahsuxbu·right·back·2U, with lotza brassnobson! Best regards as ever ≈M≈ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: GUEST,Raggytash Date: 01 Sep 15 - 08:11 AM MGM what is "Carroll the Infallible" if not name calling. Please enlighten me. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: MGM·Lion Date: 01 Sep 15 - 08:20 AM Hmmm -- see what you mean, Raggy; but that wasn't the bit Jim chose to quote & denounce, was it? And it might have been an itty-bitty sarcastic, but hardly a 'name' like "Droopydrawers" or "Lollylegz". Still -- we thank you for your interest... ≈M≈ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: Jim Carroll Date: 01 Sep 15 - 08:48 AM "mind-made-up" You seem not to have noticed, but everybody's mind is made up on the Empire Mike, even the old colonel sitting in his deckchair with his whiskey and soda, dreaming of the Imperial glory days and yearning for the chukka to pull of his boots and service the memsahib when the going gets tough - is dead and gone now, nevermore to return. You really are an anachronism, Mike. The Empire is a part of Britain's chequered past - all we have left are the trails of wreckage we left in our wake. Britain is committed to dealing with these refugees on several levels: For the part is has played in making their home countries what they are. For the damage still being caused by unethical trading, arms sales and the support given to dictators and mass murderers: the agreement with reached with the E.U. on open borders: and then, of course, there's the moral duty to assist people when they are in trouble. I wonder what would have happened if the post war British Government had treated Holocaust survivors in the way these people are being treated - shutting them out and treating them as criminals, scroungers and potential terrorists. It doesn't bear thinking about. Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 01 Sep 15 - 09:14 AM How was Britain to blame for your civil war Jim? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: GUEST, ^*^ Date: 01 Sep 15 - 09:41 AM The Empire struck - back in WWI. Why border lines drawn with a ruler in WWI still rock the Middle East From BBC News, Dec. 2013 A map marked with crude chinagraph-pencil in the second decade of the 20th Century shows the ambition - and folly - of the 100-year old British-French plan that helped create the modern-day Middle East. Read the rest by following the link. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: GUEST, ^*^ Date: 01 Sep 15 - 09:45 AM Follow the map progression here: http://www.the-map-as-history.com/maps/2-history-middle-east-ottoman.php |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: Jim Carroll Date: 01 Sep 15 - 11:16 AM "How was Britain to blame for your civil war Jim?" My Civil War? You're at it again, you little snurge - I was born in Britain of British parents and hold a British passport When will you little Englanders stop? Britain forced a treaty under threat of war imposing a partitioned Ireland - sign in three days or it's war' That is not a historical analysis of what happened - you have been given Lloyd George's exact quote verbatim sign or war. That not only cause the Civil War that was to follow, but it was the direct cause of Catholic persecution in the Six Counties and and nearly a century of ongoing bloodshed, which. Even now, the peace process is in jeopardy - that's how the Empire worked, even after it had been kicked out - divide and rule. Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: MGM·Lion Date: 01 Sep 15 - 12:46 PM "Anachronism" am I, eh Jim? And do you really imagine your brand of old-fashioned do·gooding left·wingery represents the oh-so-happening present and the bright-and-shining future? You've been looking at too many of those idealistic uplift sites, my dear old friend, where the young couple with the hammer'n'sickle embroidered underwear stand among the heaped yellow cornstooks and gaze so confidently into the effulgent dawn. A bit of a yesterday's image, it seems to me. But that's no doubt because I'm an anachronism. I was, after all, born in the reign of George V and lived thru the excitement of the Abdication crisis and the whole of WWii... So what can I know of the present world! ≈M≈ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: Greg F. Date: 01 Sep 15 - 12:58 PM I could ask what the Belgians in the Congo had to do with the 3rd Reich You could,EmGee, and you have!- which is simply one more example of your pretended (or is it real?) ignorance. Just because Leopold didn't build gas chambers doesn't mean he wasn't responsible for genocide. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: Greg F. Date: 01 Sep 15 - 01:30 PM I was, after all, born in the reign of George V and lived thru the excitement of the Abdication crisis and the whole of WWii... Ah! Well, that explains a great deal....... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: Jim Carroll Date: 01 Sep 15 - 01:39 PM "And do you really imagine your brand of old-fashioned do·gooding left·wingery represents the oh-so-happening present and the bright-and-shining future?" Do-goodery - lovely, right-wing phrase - the opposite of which is do baddery, as far as I'm concerned Whatever it represents - (me, I suppose) it isn't yearning after a time when we could hang and beat those who offended us and the natives knew their place I know (approx) when you were born - I also am aware that you still adhere to the values of that time - most of us have moved on Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 01 Sep 15 - 01:46 PM Britain forced a treaty under threat of war imposing a partitioned Ireland - sign in three days or it's war' No it did not, and the treaty you refer to was rejected by the Cabinet and then by the Dail anyway. At that time, partition was already agreed. Part of the treaty was about setting up a boundary commission to decide the border. None of it was about imposing a partition, or anything else to do with partition. The civil war was an entirely Irish thing. Britain is not really to blame for all Ireland's problems Jim. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: Dave the Gnome Date: 01 Sep 15 - 01:48 PM Another thread completely fucked I see. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: Raggytash Date: 01 Sep 15 - 01:53 PM Keith, You have already told everybody that you have not read at all on the subject of Irish History. You have clearly indicated you have no interest in the subject. Taking sound-bites off internet websites is NOT going to give you an insight into the subject. I would suggest that unless, or until, you have at least read a few books on the subject you refrain from commenting. You will notice, I hope, that I am trying to be polite. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 01 Sep 15 - 01:53 PM Not by interminable beer anecdotes this time though. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 01 Sep 15 - 01:55 PM My last was to Dave. Rag, if I have got anything wrong, please correct me. If I have given an accurate historical account, what is your objection? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: Dave the Gnome Date: 01 Sep 15 - 02:00 PM I really enjoyed my first pint last weekend. Taylor's Landlord. Forgotten how good it was. I don't think there is an accurate historical account of how good it was apart from this one though. Probably not a consensus... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: Dave the Gnome Date: 01 Sep 15 - 02:09 PM ...and what better way of celebrating hitting the 100 mark than a pleasant diversion to the Top 100 beers. :D tG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 01 Sep 15 - 02:19 PM I made a slight error anyway. The treaty was supported by narrow majorities in the Irish cabinet and the Dáil, not actually rejected as I said. Clearly not concerned much about supposed threats though. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: Raggytash Date: 01 Sep 15 - 02:20 PM Tonight I will be back on the Guinness, although I am led to believe the Camerons Strongarm in the Elsinore is excellent. I will be taking along a bottle of Red Fox's Coggeshall Beast to share with the landlord. It's the 666th gyle and is made to tip the scales at 6.66% ABV. I've tried it and it is deceptively quaffable. Hic !! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: Greg F. Date: 01 Sep 15 - 02:28 PM I would suggest that unless, or until, you have at least read a few books on the subject you refrain from commenting. Good luck with that, Raggy - its the blind leading himself. Again. As usual. Per omnia secula seculorum. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: Dave the Gnome Date: 01 Sep 15 - 02:32 PM Camerons Strongarm always used to cause an outbreak of 'Whitby Ring of Fire' around Monday of folk week. Only lasted a few hours but a surprising number of people suffered with it. Ask Ged as well. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: Jim Carroll Date: 01 Sep 15 - 02:58 PM "At that time, partition was already agreed." Partition was agreed under duress - you've had the statement It was that whiocch caused the Civil War which was been the Free State forces which supported accepting the agreement on the understanding that the six states could be won later and the Republicans, who wished to continue fighting The Free State accepted that partitioning had only been accepted under threat of war - they even accepted that The British Government had blackmailed Collins into acceptance via his affair with the American, Lady Lavery. We really are done with this Keith - you denied any threats were made, you've said Lloyd George's statement was a fake (disproved by Terrytoon); you've said he was referring to something else entirely - now you seem to want another go at something else. Sorry - for you the war is over Tommy. Go and find something else to obsess about. Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: GUEST,Tunesmith Date: 01 Sep 15 - 03:29 PM I don't if this has been mentioned before, but I don't why the EU isn't asking the USA to start taking in some - most? - of these refugees, because American involvement in the Middle-East, Afghanistan, Lybia... has a lot to do with the present refugee crisis. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 01 Sep 15 - 03:37 PM Not true Jim. Michael Laffan, head of the School of History in University College Dublin writing in "History Ireland." http://www.historyireland.com/20th-century-contemporary-history/the-emergence-of-the-two-irelands-1912-25/ "it was agreed that a boundary commission would decide the border between the two parts of Ireland. It is significant that the treaty split centred on questions of sovereignty and the oath of fidelity ('allegiance') to the king rather than on the question of partition.Few Dáil deputies discussed the matter." That split became the civil war, and it was not about partition. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 01 Sep 15 - 03:42 PM Does US ever take in refugees? If you arrive in US without a visa or ESTA you get sent back at the airline's expense to wherever you came from. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: Greg F. Date: 01 Sep 15 - 06:02 PM If you arrive in US without a visa or ESTA you get sent back at the airline's expense to wherever you came from Just like you want to do with the folks in Calis - unless, that is, you'd prefer just machine-gunning 'em, eh Professor? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: Greg F. Date: 01 Sep 15 - 06:13 PM Keith, you've admitted multiple times that you know jack shit about Irish history. Put an effing sock in it, will ya? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: Jim Carroll Date: 01 Sep 15 - 07:54 PM "Michael Laffan, head of the School of History in University Colleg" Oh, for Christ's sake!! Leave it Keith - you have now humiliated yourself beyond redemption. Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 02 Sep 15 - 04:08 AM Keith, you've admitted multiple times that you know jack shit about Irish history. That is true, but "renowned Irish historian Professor Michael Laffan," head of the School of History in University College, Dublin knows more about it than all of us put together, and he contradicts what Jim just claimed. I believe him over Jim. No brainer. Just like you want to do with the folks in Calis - unless, that is, you'd prefer just machine-gunning 'em, eh Professor? That is a vile accusation against me and completely untrue. If anyone makes it to Britain, even if illegally, they are allowed to remain as long as it takes to establish if they are refugees and entitled to stay. Illegals arriving from Calais are booked into hotels. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 02 Sep 15 - 04:13 AM "Renowned Irish historian Professor Michael Laffan introduces his series of 10 lectures on The Irish Revolution. He talks about the history of the course, its structure as well as some of the key areas covered in the lectures. Since it was first made available to podcast on History Hub in 2012, Professor Laffan's highly engaging series has proven to be tremendously popular with academic and public audiences alike. For people interested in learning about this tumultuous period in Irish history the good news is that the series is now more accessible than ever. The Irish Revolution was a module taught by Professor Laffan in the School of History and Archives, University College Dublin from the late 1970′s until his retirement in 2010." http://historyhub.ie/theirishrevolution |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: Jim Carroll Date: 02 Sep 15 - 05:19 AM Keith - if you are suggesting the Irish Civil War was was not fought on the basis of loosing six counties - forced by Brita at gunpoint You are out of your mind Stop this now Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: MGM·Lion Date: 02 Sep 15 - 06:01 AM Stop telling people to stop things, Jim. You have no authority to do so -- & it's boring. ❧☺❦ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: Jim Carroll Date: 02 Sep 15 - 07:17 AM "Stop telling people to stop things, Jim" Virtually everybody has told Keith to stop - on this, on the Famine, on World War One, on Ukraine, on his "real historians in real bookshops". Unfortunately, none of us have the authority to actually stop him (and those that do seem quite happy to allow him to behave the way he does), but we do have a right to expect to carry on an intelligent discussion without a destructive, hyperactive child nausing it up. What is boring is your describing as "boring" everything you can't hack - also notable is your tendency to let somebody take the flack for your inability - rather like your officers who were happy to let the cannon fodder go over the top. You want to take part - feel free, otherwise, mind your own business and get on with your whiskey and soda. Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: Raggytash Date: 02 Sep 15 - 07:24 AM MGM " Stop telling people to stop things, Jim. You have no authority to do so -- & it's boring" Is this not the kettle calling the pot black? Not for the first time Michael you are doing something that you criticise in others. Hardly seems fair really. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 02 Sep 15 - 08:35 AM Keith - if you are suggesting the Irish Civil War was was not fought on the basis of loosing six counties - forced by Brita at gunpoint I am suggesting nothing, but the greatest authority in the world on the history of Irish independence contradicts your view. I believe him, not you. On the famine, I merely pointed out that your view is disputed by most historians, which is a fact. On the Ukrainian famine, I showed that Stalin is known to have deliberately created it as an act of genocide. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: Dave the Gnome Date: 02 Sep 15 - 08:49 AM Always come down to narky arguments about trifling points of history doesn't it. Is it any wonder people try to change the subject? What is the weather going in North Yorkshire to be like over the next 2 and a half weeks? We are holidaying at home with American friends. Hope to sample some good beers as well. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Problems at Calais. Why? From: Raggytash Date: 02 Sep 15 - 09:10 AM Time to turn to the weather as you so rightly say Dave. Is the weather for Skipton the one for you. If so today will be sun and clouds with a shower a high of 60 and a low of 42. Tomorrow will be mainly cloudy with a shower a high of 55 and a low of 44. |