Shocking images of drowned Syrian boy show tragic plight of refugees

by Guest Wed Sep 02, 2015 7:25 pm

First topic message reminder :

The full horror of the human tragedy unfolding on the shores of Europe was brought home on Wednesday as images of the lifeless body of a young boy – one of at least 12 Syrians who drowned attempting to reach the Greek island of Kos – encapsulated the extraordinary risks refugees are taking to reach the west.

The picture, taken on Wednesday morning, depicted the dark-haired toddler, wearing a bright-red T-shirt and shorts, washed up on a beach, lying face down in the surf not far from Turkey’s fashionable resort town of Bodrum.

A second image portrays a grim-faced policeman carrying the tiny body away. Within hours it had gone viral becoming the top trending picture on Twitter under the hashtag #KiyiyaVuranInsanlik (humanity washed ashore).

Justin Forsyth, CEO of Save the Children, said: “This tragic image of a little boy who’s lost his life fleeing Syria is shocking and is a reminder of the dangers children and families are taking in search of a better life. This child’s plight should concentrate minds and force the EU to come together and agree to a plan to tackle the refugee crisis.”

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/sep/02/shocking-image-of-drowned-syrian-boy-shows-tragic-plight-of-refugees

Later in the article this is described as a refugee issue, not a migrant issue. I agree, heartbreaking Sad

by Raggamuffin Thu Sep 03, 2015 1:13 pm

Eilzel wrote:Nicko, the war ended 70 years ago, Germany are not villains and we are no longer de facto heroes. This problem is NOW, and we are not actung, Germany are in spades.

I do hope you tell others to stop talking about historical issues then Les. There are several people on here who do that, and who like to go back hundreds of years in order to blame the Brits in particular. At least Nicko only went back 70 years, and he was right to point out the hypocrisy of the Germans - if they are pointing the finger at the UK of course.

There's no real point in blaming the UK for the mess in Iraq either. Some people love to say that we created the problem there, but they had a chance to start afresh, and they blew it. Syria created their own problems, so they should sort out their own mess as well.

I think a lot of the problem is the demands rather than requests. All this stuff about the UK having a responsibility or owing this or that gets people's backs up. Each country will do what is their own best interests eventually, or they will do what they think is right morally, so there's no point anyone trying to guilt trip them into doing anything.

by Raggamuffin Thu Sep 03, 2015 1:19 pm

Eilzel wrote:Nicko, the war ended 70 years ago, Germany are not villains and we are no longer de facto heroes. This problem is NOW, and we are not actung, Germany are in spades.

I see you're playing the blame game in another thread - blaming the Brits of course. Are you sure you're British?

by Guest Thu Sep 03, 2015 1:24 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
Eilzel wrote:Nicko, the war ended 70 years ago, Germany are not villains and we are no longer de facto heroes. This problem is NOW, and we are not actung, Germany are in spades.

I see you're playing the blame game in another thread - blaming the Brits of course. Are you sure you're British?

Again absurd reasoning as if you have the monopoly on what it is to be British.
If anything by your selfish attitude you hold the least connected views of what it means to be British.
IT is a concept but for a very long time the people of this nation have looked to help others.
So if you want to argue over what it means to be British you certainly lack some of the attributes we assign to being British.

by Guest Thu Sep 03, 2015 1:28 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
Eilzel wrote:Nicko, the war ended 70 years ago, Germany are not villains and we are no longer de facto heroes. This problem is NOW, and we are not actung, Germany are in spades.

I do hope you tell others to stop talking about historical issues then Les. There are several people on here who do that, and who like to go back hundreds of years in order to blame the Brits in particular. At least Nicko only went back 70 years, and he was right to point out the hypocrisy of the Germans - if they are pointing the finger at the UK of course.

There's no real point in blaming the UK for the mess in Iraq either. Some people love to say that we created the problem there, but they had a chance to start afresh, and they blew it. Syria created their own problems, so they should sort out their own mess as well.

I think a lot of the problem is the demands rather than requests. All this stuff about the UK having a responsibility or owing this or that gets people's backs up. Each country will do what is their own best interests eventually, or they will do what they think is right morally, so there's no point anyone trying to guilt trip them into doing anything.

Nobody is blaming people today for how they are born into privalidge, that is not what is argued, what is though is that because of the past is why this country is as economically powerful as it is today because of the past. That is what you fail to grasp. So to claim people blame the past is again daft reasoning from yourself. Now you can still offer up poor reasoning but the only reason you are here is because you were lucky to be born here based on georgraphy, which makes you have some daft reasoning to think you can deny others. Where nothing you did created the economic power this nation was from whence you were born. You think by the pitiful contribution you make into the economy, which is miniscule gies you some pathetic reason to deny others the benefits you have from living here. Its just a very selfish view point you have, where its so clear you wish to deny helping others and your reasoning is?
"Me, me, me, me"

by Eilzel Thu Sep 03, 2015 1:40 pm

Yes I'm British, and undeluded enough to be able to admit when my country is wrong.

On history.

Germany and Britain's actions 70 years ago are unrelated to this subject.

Britain's actions a mere 12 years or 2 years ago (war in Iraq/ non interference in Syria) ARE directly connected to this refugee crisis.

Look beyond simple 'you said no history there, but mention there' BS. If its connected its relevant if its not, forget it.

by Raggamuffin Thu Sep 03, 2015 1:47 pm

Eilzel wrote:Yes I'm British, and undeluded enough to be able to admit when my country is wrong.

On history.

Germany and Britain's actions 70 years ago are unrelated to this subject.

Britain's actions a mere 12 years or 2 years ago (war in Iraq/ non interference in Syria) ARE directly connected to this refugee crisis.

Look beyond simple 'you said no history there, but mention there' BS. If its connected its relevant if its not, forget it.

12 years ago is history Les. The situation in Iraq now is down to themselves and/or ISIS. The situation in Syria is nothing to do with us. I bet you cheered at the Arab Spring didn't you?

You totally missed the point of what Nicko was saying anyway. He was talking about the blame game and the hypocrisy of the Germans having a go at Britain.

I think this will damage Europe actually - there are several countries who are tired of being told what to do or being blamed for not doing something.

I might even vote to come out of the EU because I'm tired of the same old crap.

by Eilzel Thu Sep 03, 2015 2:04 pm

Because he was saying it based on Germany's actions 70 years ago which are completely unrelated to their actions of today. The Germany government has a far higher moral position than the British government of today. Our recent actions in Iraq and entirely relevant here however. You have zero understanding of history raggs, to the point there is little point continuing this discussion with you.

by Raggamuffin Thu Sep 03, 2015 2:09 pm

Eilzel wrote:Because he was saying it based on Germany's actions 70 years ago which are completely unrelated to their actions of today. The Germany government has a far higher moral position than the British government of today. Our recent actions in Iraq and entirely relevant here however. You have zero understanding of history raggs, to the point there is little point continuing this discussion with you.

Well it's nice that you think the Germans are so virtuous, but you still missed the point of what he was saying.

I understand a lot more than you do, and at least I understand the point of what someone is saying - unlike you.

by Raggamuffin Thu Sep 03, 2015 2:11 pm

So you think that the situation in the Middle East now is nothing to do with what happened in Germany 70 years ago then Les?

by Eilzel Thu Sep 03, 2015 2:19 pm

I think the situation in the middle east is connected to the fall of the Ottoman empire and the way the UK and France carved up the region after WW1, and the eventual hand over of independence after WW2. The only connection to nazi Germany is the creation of Israel. But more immediately, the crisis largely relates to ISIS and their growth, first by ruining Iraq, then by not getting involved against Assad and as such allowing ISIS to grow amd thrive.

by Raggamuffin Thu Sep 03, 2015 2:28 pm

Eilzel wrote:I think the situation in the middle east is connected to the fall of the Ottoman empire and the way the UK and France carved up the region after WW1, and the eventual hand over of independence after WW2. The only connection to nazi Germany is the creation of Israel. But more immediately, the crisis largely relates to ISIS and their growth, first by ruining Iraq, then by not getting involved against Assad and as such allowing ISIS to grow amd thrive.

Oh, so now you are interested in what happened 70 years, or even 90 odd years ago - because it gives you yet another chance to blame Britain. You're so transparent.

Who started WW2 by the way?

So Britain have "allowed" ISIS to thrive, as well as everything else. Well do you think we should invade Iraq again perhaps? Do you also blame the Germans for allowing ISIS to thrive, or are they still paragons of virtue?

by Eilzel Thu Sep 03, 2015 2:37 pm

The modern German military is not comparable to the British military. They also have no colonial history in the region, and were not part of a destabilising invasion in the region in recent times. Germany have no cinnections whatsoever to the existence of ISIS.

The fact you simplistically think I am just out to knock Britain is pathetic. You are blindly ignorant of history and how things are connected between past and present. I am overwhelmingly proud of my nation, but not to the point of ignoring our part played in global affairs when it is negative.

by Raggamuffin Thu Sep 03, 2015 2:43 pm

Eilzel wrote:The modern German military is not comparable to the British military. They also have no colonial history in the region, and were not part of a destabilising invasion in the region in recent times. Germany have no cinnections whatsoever to the existence of ISIS.

The fact you simplistically think I am just out to knock Britain is pathetic. You are blindly ignorant of history and how things are connected between past and present. I am overwhelmingly proud of my nation, but not to the point of ignoring our part played in global affairs when it is negative.

Oh, but I thought you weren't interested in history, only in what happens now. Germany didn't stop ISIS, so why are you not blaming them? Oh of course - they're not British so they can't be blamed for anything.

I'm replying to what you're saying. One minute you're not interested in history, the next minute you are - if it means you can blame the Brits. No wonder you left - perhaps you should stay away as you seem to hate it so much.

by Raggamuffin Thu Sep 03, 2015 2:45 pm

Eilzel wrote:The modern German military is not comparable to the British military. They also have no colonial history in the region, and were not part of a destabilising invasion in the region in recent times. Germany have no cinnections whatsoever to the existence of ISIS.

The fact you simplistically think I am just out to knock Britain is pathetic. You are blindly ignorant of history and how things are connected between past and present. I am overwhelmingly proud of my nation, but not to the point of ignoring our part played in global affairs when it is negative.

Says the person who told Nicko that what happened 70 years ago is old news.

I'm tired of your stupid posts. You are the ignorant one with your head in the sand. You have no idea about anything.

by Guest Thu Sep 03, 2015 2:46 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
Eilzel wrote:The modern German military is not comparable to the British military. They also have no colonial history in the region, and were not part of a destabilising invasion in the region in recent times. Germany have no cinnections whatsoever to the existence of ISIS.

The fact you simplistically think I am just out to knock Britain is pathetic. You are blindly ignorant of history and how things are connected between past and present. I am overwhelmingly proud of my nation, but not to the point of ignoring our part played in global affairs when it is negative.

Says the person who told Nicko that what happened 70 years ago is old news.

I'm tired of your stupid posts. You are the ignorant one with your head in the sand. You have no idea about anything.

Context failure alert.

by Eilzel Thu Sep 03, 2015 2:50 pm

I've explained this a dozen times, when history is related or not. You are too fucking stupid to warrant me explaining it again. I also just explained multiple differences regarding Germany, but you are too ignorant to address those either. I'm done with you, you are either blindly prejudiced, ignorant or heartless.

by Raggamuffin Thu Sep 03, 2015 2:51 pm

Eilzel wrote:I've explained this a dozen times, when history is related or not. You are too fucking stupid to warrant me explaining it again. I also just explained multiple differences regarding Germany, but you are too ignorant to address those either. I'm done with you, you are either blindly prejudiced, ignorant or heartless.

It's related when it suits you - when you can blame the Brits. When it doesn't suit you, only the present counts.

You're the ignorant one, you're anti-British, and very stupid as well.

by Guest Thu Sep 03, 2015 2:52 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
Eilzel wrote:I've explained this a dozen times, when history is related or not. You are too fucking stupid to warrant me explaining it again. I also just explained multiple differences regarding Germany, but you are too ignorant to address those either. I'm done with you, you are either blindly prejudiced, ignorant or heartless.

It's related when it suits you - when you can blame the Brits. When it doesn't suit you, only the present counts.

You're the ignorant one, you're anti-British, and very stupid as well.

Shocking images of drowned Syrian boy show tragic plight of refugees - Page 2 Not-listening-otter-meme

by Eilzel Thu Sep 03, 2015 2:54 pm

Anti-British, anti-British yeah, yeah. Just going on pretending Britain is a saintly nation that never caused any problems in the world raggs, if it keeps you content beneath your Union Flag duvet...

by Raggamuffin Thu Sep 03, 2015 2:57 pm

Eilzel wrote:Anti-British, anti-British yeah, yeah. Just going on pretending Britain is a saintly nation that never caused any problems in the world raggs, if it keeps you content beneath your Union Flag duvet...

According to you, the Brits are responsible for virtually everything, including the beheading of people by ISIS.

by Eilzel Thu Sep 03, 2015 2:59 pm

You really don't progress much beyond simple understandings do you...

by Raggamuffin Thu Sep 03, 2015 3:02 pm

Eilzel wrote:You really don't progress much beyond simple understandings do you...

You don't progress to any understanding of anything whatsoever.

by Guest Thu Sep 03, 2015 6:53 pm

OK...lets just look at this....

how many want to come here??
1000?
5000?
50,000
500,000?

or what.

REFUGEES...(and pray how are you going to tell "real ones" from IS bombers?) are in need acceptable

but the problem we are discussing of course is soley down to the lefties insistance on being "santa clause to de evry race" as the song said....

if we hadnt got however many millions of "migrants" (as opposed to refugee) then I doubt that there would be many problems at all...
but in the perception of a large %age of people there is not the seperation of the two....all that matters is that they are foreigners and they are comming here. which you may be sure is a PR problem caused by the govt and media.

NOW its all very well arguing that "we can accomodate" 20 billion migrants and their budgie or whatever

Its all very well arguing that we can simply concrete over every bit of this country (after all most that advocate that dont actually give a toss about the atural world....) and that we can "simply build nwe cities, new hospitals new schools new surgeries etc

its all very well saying we can magic up jobs

etc etc etc

BUT ther REALITY IS...we cant

HOW?, since according to the tories we are skint to the point we should torture and kill off 1000's of sick and disabled...can we afford all that new infrastructure....some one is going to have to pay for it

what we going to do...remove ALL benefits except for those "a bit poor" migrants (not refugees....the number of those is insignificant)

tax the poor (via vat) even harder....

make it impossible for anyone earning low wages or unemployed /sick/disabled to have ANY of lifes little luxuries???

sure...in the name of "multiculturalism" and in the name of some uncertain unnamed and occult dread of past deeds (angst) let us turn the "poor classes" of this country into destitute slaves.....

and for those bothered to reply dont reply with "it can be done"
or It should be done

or we have to be fair or
any of the other drivel

just tell me HOW it can be done.....

either that or accept that the whole tory pogrom against OUR low waged, unwaged, sick and disabled is nothing but a damned lie propagated in order to put money into the hands of the disgusting, fat idle rich and has NOTHING to do with fiscal wisdom.

by Guest Thu Sep 03, 2015 6:56 pm

Sadly the migrant issue and the illegal immigrant issue has coloured many peoples judgement. These frustrations mean people have less sympathy for genuine refugees.

The lack of ability to deport people who commit crime here or who are in the UK illegally hasn't helped.

The European Court of Human Rights hasn't helped either. If people are here in genuine fear of their lives why come here and commit crime? The right to family life, would you risk your life or that of your family by committing crime once you have reached a place of safety? If you do shouldn't your place here be given to someone who is prepared to live by our values and contribute to society in a positive way?

I have no problem with genuine refugees, it's those who come here to abuse the system that I object to

by Raggamuffin Thu Sep 03, 2015 7:03 pm

To be honest, for me it's not the issue of whether refugees should come here or not, it's more the language people use when they talk about it. It's full of demands instead of requests. They say we have a responsibility or an obligation to take them, that's it's expected of us, that we caused the problem so we should pay for that by taking more.

Well we're not responsible for the problem, and nothing is expected because it's a voluntary thing. If we take more, it should be because we want to, not because anyone says we should.

I think this is what is pissing off some other countries too. They're tired of this "moral highground" thing.

by Raggamuffin Thu Sep 03, 2015 7:05 pm

victorismyhero wrote:OK...lets just look at this....

how many want to come here??
1000?
5000?
50,000
500,000?

or what.

REFUGEES...(and pray how are you going to tell "real ones" from IS bombers?) are in need acceptable

but the problem we are discussing of course is soley down to the lefties insistance on being "santa clause to de evry race" as the song said....

if we hadnt got however many millions of "migrants" (as opposed to refugee) then I doubt that there would be many problems at all...
but in the perception of a large %age of people there is not the seperation of the two....all that matters is that they are foreigners and they are comming here. which you may be sure is a PR problem caused by the govt and media.

NOW its all very well arguing that "we can accomodate" 20 billion migrants and their budgie or whatever

Its all very well arguing that we can simply concrete over every bit of this country (after all most that advocate that dont actually give a toss about the atural world....) and that we can "simply build nwe cities, new hospitals new schools new surgeries etc

its all very well saying we can magic up jobs

etc etc etc

BUT ther REALITY IS...we cant

HOW?, since according to the tories we are skint to the point we should torture and kill off 1000's of sick and disabled...can we afford all that new infrastructure....some one is going to have to pay for it

what we going to do...remove ALL benefits except for those "a bit poor" migrants (not refugees....the number of those is insignificant)

tax the poor (via vat) even harder....

make it impossible for anyone earning low wages or unemployed /sick/disabled to have ANY of lifes little luxuries???

sure...in the name of "multiculturalism" and in the name of some uncertain unnamed and occult dread of past deeds (angst) let us turn the "poor classes" of this country into destitute slaves.....

and for those bothered to reply dont reply with "it can be done"
or It should be done

or we have to be fair or
any of the other drivel

just tell me HOW it can be done.....

either that or accept that the whole tory pogrom against OUR low waged, unwaged, sick and disabled is nothing but a damned lie propagated in order to put money into the hands of the disgusting, fat idle rich and has NOTHING to do with fiscal wisdom.

Those who moan about the cuts in services and the lack of housing are usually the ones who say we should take in many more refugees.

It's not very logical really.

by Raggamuffin Thu Sep 03, 2015 7:08 pm

feelthelove wrote:Sadly the migrant issue and the illegal immigrant issue has coloured many peoples judgement. These frustrations mean people have less sympathy for genuine refugees.

The lack of ability to deport people who commit crime here or who are in the UK illegally hasn't helped.

The European Court of Human Rights hasn't helped either. If people are here in genuine fear of their lives why come here and commit crime? The right to family life, would you risk your life or that of your family by committing crime once you have reached a place of safety? If you do shouldn't your place here be given to someone who is prepared to live by our values and contribute to society in a positive way?

I have no problem with genuine refugees, it's those who come here to abuse the system that I object to

I agree with a lot of your post. The issue of being unwilling or unable to deport those who break the law, or those who shouldn't be here is a big problem. I think the fear is that once people are here, they are here to stay whether they're legal or not. I also think that's why a lot want to come here - they know they'll get to stay as soon as they set foot in this country.

by eddie Thu Sep 03, 2015 7:11 pm

sassy wrote:It amazes me that it has taken pictures of drowned children to wake people up. Over 3,500 drowned last year, many of them children, and a lot more this year. If you put your children on leaky boats you have to think that they are safer than the land you are leaving. And have the pictures brought everyone to their senses. Not a chance. Today a picture of a mother in the sea trying to stop her baby drowning was shown:

Some scummy person re-circulated it like this:

The mother and baby drowned. I hope the bastard who changed the picture gets his just desserts one way or the other.

Hope you don't mind but I've reposted this post and picture on Facebook.

by Guest Thu Sep 03, 2015 7:14 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
victorismyhero wrote:OK...lets just look at this....

how many want to come here??
1000?
5000?
50,000
500,000?

or what.

REFUGEES...(and pray how are you going to tell "real ones" from IS bombers?) are in need acceptable

but the problem we are discussing of course is soley down to the lefties insistance on being "santa clause to de evry race" as the song said....

if we hadnt got however many millions of "migrants" (as opposed to refugee) then I doubt that there would be many problems at all...
but in the perception of a large %age of people there is not the seperation of the two....all that matters is that they are foreigners and they are comming here. which you may be sure is a PR problem caused by the govt and media.

NOW its all very well arguing that "we can accomodate" 20 billion migrants and their budgie or whatever

Its all very well arguing that we can simply concrete over every bit of this country (after all most that advocate that dont actually give a toss about the atural world....) and that we can "simply build nwe cities, new hospitals new schools new surgeries etc

its all very well saying we can magic up jobs

etc etc etc

BUT ther REALITY IS...we cant

HOW?, since according to the tories we are skint to the point we should torture and kill off 1000's of sick and disabled...can we afford all that new infrastructure....some one is going to have to pay for it

what we going to do...remove ALL benefits except for those "a bit poor" migrants (not refugees....the number of those is insignificant)

tax the poor (via vat) even harder....

make it impossible for anyone earning low wages or unemployed /sick/disabled to have ANY of lifes little luxuries???

sure...in the name of "multiculturalism" and in the name of some uncertain unnamed and occult dread of past deeds (angst) let us turn the "poor classes" of this country into destitute slaves.....

and for those bothered to reply dont reply with "it can be done"
or It should be done

or we have to be fair or
any of the other drivel

just tell me HOW it can be done.....

either that or accept that the whole tory pogrom against OUR low waged, unwaged, sick and disabled is nothing but a damned lie propagated in order to put money into the hands of the disgusting, fat idle rich and has NOTHING to do with fiscal wisdom.

Those who moan about the cuts in services and the lack of housing are usually the ones who say we should take in many more refugees.

It's not very logical really.

Well ragga, I am opposed to the benefit cuts/lack of housing etc...and NOT opposed to REFUGEES....I am however opposed to mere economic migration (which is the vast majority)

that apparantly makes me firstly a socialist and secondly a nationalist....

so then I'm compared to hitler and accused of being a nazi....

ah well....cant please evryone...so i dont care if i dont please ANY-one........

by Guest Thu Sep 03, 2015 7:23 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
feelthelove wrote:Sadly the migrant issue and the illegal immigrant issue has coloured many peoples judgement. These frustrations mean people have less sympathy for genuine refugees.

The lack of ability to deport people who commit crime here or who are in the UK illegally hasn't helped.

The European Court of Human Rights hasn't helped either. If people are here in genuine fear of their lives why come here and commit crime? The right to family life, would you risk your life or that of your family by committing crime once you have reached a place of safety? If you do shouldn't your place here be given to someone who is prepared to live by our values and contribute to society in a positive way?

I have no problem with genuine refugees, it's those who come here to abuse the system that I object to

I agree with a lot of your post. The issue of being unwilling or unable to deport those who break the law, or those who shouldn't be here is a big problem. I think the fear is that once people are here, they are here to stay whether they're legal or not. I also think that's why a lot want to come here - they know they'll get to stay as soon as they set foot in this country.

Thanks, it's terrible because it denies people in real need. It's the same with the benefits system, we always hear those fraudulently claiming hitting the headlines. It makes the lives of so many people in genuine need so much harder.

Some people have no conscience Sad

Drives me crazy Shocking images of drowned Syrian boy show tragic plight of refugees - Page 2 Drives10

by Raggamuffin Thu Sep 03, 2015 7:26 pm

I just don't want any more people here generally really. It's already a nightmare getting anywhere in this country, either by car or train. I don't give a shit if that sounds silly or petty.

We could have some orphaned children though - poor little souls.

by Guest Thu Sep 03, 2015 7:36 pm

victorismyhero wrote:OK...lets just look at this....

how many want to come here??
1000?
5000?
50,000
500,000?

or what.

REFUGEES...(and pray how are you going to tell "real ones" from IS bombers?) are in need acceptable

but the problem we are discussing of course is soley down to the lefties insistance on being "santa clause to de evry race" as the song said....

if we hadnt got however many millions of "migrants" (as opposed to refugee) then I doubt that there would be many problems at all...
but in the perception of a large %age of people there is not the seperation of the two....all that matters is that they are foreigners and they are comming here. which you may be sure is a PR problem caused by the govt and media.

NOW its all very well arguing that "we can accomodate" 20 billion migrants and their budgie or whatever

Its all very well arguing that we can simply concrete over every bit of this country (after all most that advocate that dont actually give a toss about the atural world....) and that we can "simply build nwe cities, new hospitals new schools new surgeries etc

its all very well saying we can magic up jobs

etc etc etc

BUT ther REALITY IS...we cant

HOW?, since according to the tories we are skint to the point we should torture and kill off 1000's of sick and disabled...can we afford all that new infrastructure....some one is going to have to pay for it

what we going to do...remove ALL benefits except for those "a bit poor" migrants (not refugees....the number of those is insignificant)

tax the poor (via vat) even harder....

make it impossible for anyone earning low wages or unemployed /sick/disabled to have ANY of lifes little luxuries???

sure...in the name of "multiculturalism" and in the name of some uncertain unnamed and occult dread of past deeds (angst) let us turn the "poor classes" of this country into destitute slaves.....

and for those bothered to reply dont reply with "it can be done"
or It should be done

or we have to be fair or
any of the other drivel

just tell me HOW it can be done.....

either that or accept that the whole tory pogrom against OUR low waged, unwaged, sick and disabled is nothing but a damned lie propagated in order to put money into the hands of the disgusting, fat idle rich and has NOTHING to do with fiscal wisdom.

We have been though this argument before and before I showed its flaws.
You wanted me to say the Tory plan is flawed.
I agreed that it was.
Money should never be an object when it comes to helping people no matter where they are from around the world, where this country can afford to help, even more so the people.
They are on a par with the homeless here these refugees, except the homeless have citizenship, not that this helps them in any shape or form.
So it can be done to help.
These people are in need of help sooner rather than later and hence why it should be a priority as much as we should make it a priority to house our homeless.
We have a million vacant properties and its time we put them to use

FTL makes a fair point in how where illegal immigrants found out colour how we see genuine migrants and where its such a daft process trying to deport people that should be deported. This angers people making less open to helping others. They wrongly class the refugees as takers, when they are truly in need. So there is some merit to how we portray things in the media how the public becomes so divided over this issue

by Guest Thu Sep 03, 2015 7:41 pm

we have even more that the million vacant properties didge....

ALL second homes unless clearly and indisputeably a business, (ie rental properties, holiday lets etc) should be seized and used....(and business use could be defined to EXCLUDE the owner EVER occuping said property to ensure it IS business only)

by Guest Thu Sep 03, 2015 7:44 pm

victorismyhero wrote:we have even more that the million vacant properties didge....

ALL second homes unless clearly and indisputeably a business, (ie rental properties, holiday lets etc) should be seized and used....(and business use could be defined to EXCLUDE the owner EVER occuping said property to ensure it IS business only)

There you go mate. Part of the solution you seek, what needs to happen is some laws to change.

Anyway catch you later buddy

by Raggamuffin Thu Sep 03, 2015 8:11 pm

victorismyhero wrote:we have even more that the million vacant properties didge....

ALL second homes unless clearly and indisputeably a business, (ie rental properties, holiday lets etc) should be seized and used....(and business use could be defined to EXCLUDE the owner EVER occuping said property to ensure it IS business only)

What if the rental property is being rented out already? You'd chuck out the tenants so foreigners can have it?

I presume you don't go on holiday in a holiday let, and you only stay in hotels. Perhaps they should seize all the vacant rooms in hotels too - or maybe chuck you out in the middle of the night so a refugee can have your bed.

by Guest Thu Sep 03, 2015 8:17 pm

The father of a three-year-old boy photographed lying dead on a beach has said all he wants to do is "lie in a grave" with his children.

Abdullah Kurdi, a Kurdish Syrian who also lost another of his sons and his wife, described the moments before he realised his family had drowned.

He said he was forced to take control of the boat after the captain panicked and jumped into the sea in high waves.

"We went into the sea for four minutes and the captain saw that the waves were so high and as he tried to steer the boat we were hit immediately. He panicked and dived into the sea and fled," he said.

"I took over and started steering, but the waves were so high that the boat flipped immediately. "I took my wife and my kids in my arms and I realised they were all dead," he said. "My kids were the most beautiful children in the world. Wonderful. They woke me up every morning to play with them and now, they are all gone. Now all I want is to lie in a grave next to my wife and children."

http://news.sky.com/story/1546212/drowned-boys-father-tells-how-boat-capsized

I can't imagine living with this Sad

those who abuse the system should hang their heads in shame

by Guest Thu Sep 03, 2015 8:18 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
victorismyhero wrote:we have even more that the million vacant properties didge....

ALL second homes unless clearly and indisputeably a business, (ie rental properties, holiday lets etc) should be seized and used....(and business use could be defined to EXCLUDE the owner EVER occuping said property to ensure it IS business only)

What if the rental property is being rented out already? You'd chuck out the tenants so foreigners can have it?

I presume you don't go on holiday in a holiday let, and you only stay in hotels. Perhaps they should seize all the vacant rooms in hotels too - or maybe chuck you out in the middle of the night so a refugee can have your bed.

are you actually stupid...or did you merely misread what i said?????

try again ....I SAID "unless clearly and indisputeably a business, (ie rental properties, holiday lets etc)"

what part of UNLESS CLEARLY AND INDISPUTEABLY a busines(ie rental properties holiday lets etc) has failed to penetrate your primitive brain cell?

can you not read?

I.E

i.e. is the abbreviation of the Latin phrase 'id est,' meaning 'that is.' e.g. is the abbreviation of the Latin phrase 'exempli gratia,' meaning 'for example.' Use i.e. when you want to give further explanation for something.
Know your Latin: i.e. vs. e.g. | Grammarly Blog
www.grammarly.com/blog/2014/know-your-latin-i-e-vs-e-g/

by Raggamuffin Thu Sep 03, 2015 8:23 pm

victorismyhero wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

What if the rental property is being rented out already? You'd chuck out the tenants so foreigners can have it?

I presume you don't go on holiday in a holiday let, and you only stay in hotels. Perhaps they should seize all the vacant rooms in hotels too - or maybe chuck you out in the middle of the night so a refugee can have your bed.

are you actually stupid...or did you merely misread what i said?????

try again ....I SAID "unless clearly and indisputeably a business, (ie rental properties, holiday lets etc)"

what part of UNLESS CLEARLY AND INDISPUTEABLY a busines(ie rental properties holiday lets etc) has failed to penetrate your primitive brain cell?

can you not read?

I.E

i.e. is the abbreviation of the Latin phrase 'id est,' meaning 'that is.' e.g. is the abbreviation of the Latin phrase 'exempli gratia,' meaning 'for example.' Use i.e. when you want to give further explanation for something.
Know your Latin: i.e. vs. e.g. | Grammarly Blog
www.grammarly.com/blog/2014/know-your-latin-i-e-vs-e-g/

Oh I see - it was your grammar which was at fault. You should have made it clearer - stupid arsehole.

by Raggamuffin Thu Sep 03, 2015 8:27 pm

If there any houses going spare, they should be used for homeless people here first before they're handed out to anyone else. Charity begins at home.

by Guest Thu Sep 03, 2015 8:28 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
victorismyhero wrote:

are you actually stupid...or did you merely misread what i said?????

try again ....I SAID "unless clearly and indisputeably a business, (ie rental properties, holiday lets etc)"

what part of UNLESS CLEARLY AND INDISPUTEABLY a busines(ie rental properties holiday lets etc) has failed to penetrate your primitive brain cell?

can you not read?

I.E

i.e. is the abbreviation of the Latin phrase 'id est,' meaning 'that is.' e.g. is the abbreviation of the Latin phrase 'exempli gratia,' meaning 'for example.' Use i.e. when you want to give further explanation for something.
Know your Latin: i.e. vs. e.g. | Grammarly Blog
www.grammarly.com/blog/2014/know-your-latin-i-e-vs-e-g/

Oh I see - it was your grammar which was at fault. You should have made it clearer - stupid arsehole.

no my grammar was quite correct...ignoramus

by Raggamuffin Thu Sep 03, 2015 8:30 pm

You didn't have to be so fucking rude.

by eddie Thu Sep 03, 2015 8:34 pm

feelthelove wrote:The father of a three-year-old boy photographed lying dead on a beach has said all he wants to do is "lie in a grave" with his children.

Abdullah Kurdi, a Kurdish Syrian who also lost another of his sons and his wife, described the moments before he realised his family had drowned.

He said he was forced to take control of the boat after the captain panicked and jumped into the sea in high waves.

"We went into the sea for four minutes and the captain saw that the waves were so high and as he tried to steer the boat we were hit immediately. He panicked and dived into the sea and fled," he said.

"I took over and started steering, but the waves were so high that the boat flipped immediately. "I took my wife and my kids in my arms and I realised they were all dead," he said. "My kids were the most beautiful children in the world. Wonderful. They woke me up every morning to play with them and now, they are all gone. Now all I want is to lie in a grave next to my wife and children."

http://news.sky.com/story/1546212/drowned-boys-father-tells-how-boat-capsized

I can't imagine living with this those who abuse the system should hang their heads in shame

Yet there are people that think they are doing this to gain something????

by Guest Thu Sep 03, 2015 8:36 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:You didn't have to be so fucking rude.

why not potty mouth?

by Guest Thu Sep 03, 2015 8:57 pm

German newspaper calls Cameron 'the Slacker of Europe'

Shocking images of drowned Syrian boy show tragic plight of refugees - Page 2 COAMafIWUAA98VR

Shocking images of drowned Syrian boy show tragic plight of refugees - Page 2 COAMafIWUAA98VR

by Guest Thu Sep 03, 2015 9:03 pm

They should be damned ashamed of themselves that they can not take in their fellow Muslim brothers and sisters. Aren't Muslims supposed to help each other in their hour of need? These wealthy nations should be the first to reach out to these poor people.

As the crisis brews over Syrian refugees trying to enter European countries, questions have been raised over why they are not heading to wealthy Gulf states closer to home.

A Facebook page called The Syrian Community in Denmark has shared a video showing migrants being allowed to enter Austria from Hungary, prompting one user to ask: "How did we flee from the region of our Muslim brethren, which should take more responsibility for us than a country they describe as infidels?"
Another user replied: "I swear to the Almighty God, it's the Arabs who are the infidels."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-34132308

by Guest Thu Sep 03, 2015 9:08 pm

Christie wrote:They should be damned ashamed of themselves that they can not take in their fellow Muslim brothers and sisters. Aren't Muslims supposed to help each other in their hour of need? These wealthy nations should be the first to reach out to these poor people.

As the crisis brews over Syrian refugees trying to enter European countries, questions have been raised over why they are not heading to wealthy Gulf states closer to home.

A Facebook page called The Syrian Community in Denmark has shared a video showing migrants being allowed to enter Austria from Hungary, prompting one user to ask: "How did we flee from the region of our Muslim brethren, which should take more responsibility for us than a country they describe as infidels?"
Another user replied: "I swear to the Almighty God, it's the Arabs who are the infidels."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-34132308

There are over 4 million Syrian refugees, and the majority of them are in Jordan, Lebanon and Turkey. I was surprised to find that a very wealthy Egyptian has offered to buy an island for them:

http://qasioun.net/en/article/Egyptian-business-man-to-make-independent-island-new-home-for-Syrian-refugees/3073/

by Tommy Monk Thu Sep 03, 2015 9:12 pm

feelthelove wrote:
Tommy Monk wrote:Is indeed a tragedy...

Why is op claiming Greek island when found on Turkish beach?

Morning Tommy, it's because they were trying to reach the Greek island of Kos.

Should have stayed in turkey... or travelled north through to Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan and/Or Kazakhstan... all vast countries with loads of space for them.

I keep hearing this number accepted to Britain as asylum seekers... how many syrians have arrived in Britain in the last couple of years who are not categorized as asylum seekers I wonder...!!!???

I bet it's a lot...

But don't let the true numbers get in the way of a good bit of spin...

by Guest Thu Sep 03, 2015 9:19 pm

sassy wrote:
Christie wrote:They should be damned ashamed of themselves that they can not take in their fellow Muslim brothers and sisters. Aren't Muslims supposed to help each other in their hour of need? These wealthy nations should be the first to reach out to these poor people.

As the crisis brews over Syrian refugees trying to enter European countries, questions have been raised over why they are not heading to wealthy Gulf states closer to home.

A Facebook page called The Syrian Community in Denmark has shared a video showing migrants being allowed to enter Austria from Hungary, prompting one user to ask: "How did we flee from the region of our Muslim brethren, which should take more responsibility for us than a country they describe as infidels?"
Another user replied: "I swear to the Almighty God, it's the Arabs who are the infidels."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-34132308

There are over 4 million Syrian refugees, and the majority of them are in Jordan, Lebanon and Turkey. I was surprised to find that a very wealthy Egyptian has offered to buy an island for them:

http://qasioun.net/en/article/Egyptian-business-man-to-make-independent-island-new-home-for-Syrian-refugees/3073/

That's very generous and kind of him and a brilliant idea. I hope it comes to fruition. I know some Muslim countries are helping, however these rich Gulf states should be reaching out to these refugees too. I find it unbelievable that they aren't.

by Guest Thu Sep 03, 2015 9:22 pm

Christie wrote:
sassy wrote:

There are over 4 million Syrian refugees, and the majority of them are in Jordan, Lebanon and Turkey. I was surprised to find that a very wealthy Egyptian has offered to buy an island for them:

http://qasioun.net/en/article/Egyptian-business-man-to-make-independent-island-new-home-for-Syrian-refugees/3073/

That's very generous and kind of him and a brilliant idea. I hope it comes to fruition. I know some Muslim countries are helping, however these rich Gulf states should be reaching out to these refugees too. I find it unbelievable that they aren't.

Agree, they should, it is the poorer ones who are giving the most help.

by Tommy Monk Thu Sep 03, 2015 9:23 pm

Why aren't they going north by land through turkey and into Turkmenistan/Uzbekistan/Kazakhstan...!!!???

All three huge countries with masses of space...?

by Sponsored content