Katie Hopkins Attacked For Migrants Column After Drowned Syrian Toddler Washes Ashore

First topic message reminder :

vehemently anti-migrant column penned by Sun columnist Katie Hopkins, which saw her invite the media to show her “bodies floating in water”, has resurfaced amid heartbreaking images of a drowned Syrian toddler washed up on a Turkish beach. On Wednesday three-year-old Aylan Kurdi was found face-down on a beach in Turkey, after the vessels carrying him, his family and 19 other refugees sank as they attempted to reach the Greek island of Kos. Images of Aylan’s tiny lifeless body being gently carried from the shore have shocked the world – and brought back to mind Hopkins’ comments, in a piece entitled: ‘Rescue boats? I’d use gunships to stop migrants’.

The mother-of-three likened those fleeing war torn nations – like Aylan and his family who left their hometown of Kobane after it was besieged by Islamic State militants – to “cockroaches” and called for them to be turned away with force.
“No, I don’t care. Show me pictures of coffins, show me bodies floating in the water, play violins and show me skinny people looking sad.

“I still don’t care.”
The column which dates back to April has put Hopkins in the firing line on social media once again.

@KTHopkins "Show me bodies floating in the water, I don't care" - Their names were Alyan and Galip. Hang your head. pic.twitter.com/kuWhBR2usr
— Katie Elin-Salt (@KatieElinSalt) September 3, 2015

“@jpublik: Someone got their wish in the end cc @KTHopkins pic.twitter.com/wy8P4iVnBz” Vile. You'd have to have a heart of stone.
— The WOO (@Woo100) September 3, 2015

Good day for you? @KTHopkins pic.twitter.com/pJseQVzCYX
— Al Britten (@AlBritten) September 3, 2015

Anyone who thinks Katie Hopkins is "funny" or "real", she was talking about the little Syrian boy when she said this pic.twitter.com/OvANzEwSQt
— Amy (@AmyxJean) September 3, 2015

Did Katie Hopkins smirk at the little boy, who was dead on the beach, I bet she did. https://t.co/8wB5sddvbQ
— All Jokes Aside (@spittingvenom1) September 3, 2015

Are you happy now @KTHopkins https://t.co/azTodK6wT2
— john michael pratt (@johnmp04) September 3, 2015

does @KTHopkins know the internet never forgets? rot in hell you vile waste of oxygen pic.twitter.com/ZW4LxOyi4j
— Amanda Hugginkiis (@grande_lattte) September 3, 2015

FLASHBACK: @KTHopkins pic.twitter.com/Nhcasjqtly
— Media Guido (@MediaGuido) September 3, 2015

In August it emerged Hopkins had been questioned by police over allegations of incitement of racial hatred – believed to be in connection with the column. A petition calling for Hopkins to be sacked from the newspaper reached more than 300,000 signatures and even the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights added his voice to the protests. Jordanian Zeid Ra'ad Al Hussein said the reality television star had used language in her column similar to that used by newspapers and radio stations in Rwanda before the 1994 genocide that led to hundreds of thousands of people being slaughtered.

Al Hussein urged authorities in the UK to use the law to clamp down on "vicious verbal assault on migrants and asylum seekers in the UK tabloid press", adding: "The Nazi media described people their masters wanted to eliminate as rats and cockroaches. This type of language is clearly inflammatory and unacceptable, especially in a national newspaper.

"The Sun's editors took an editorial decision to publish this article, and - if it is found in breach of the law - should be held responsible along with the author." In June Hopkins reflected upon the column, admitting she regretted some of the extreme language she used. She told the Press Association: "There's some things about that column, there are some words which in hindsight you'd probably look to pull out of there.

"But I think overall my message isn't about the idea that we want to see migrants and people suffering, it's an idea that we need to find solutions to problems."


http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/09/03/katie-hopkins-attacked-for-migrants-column-after-drowned-syrian-refugee-washes-ashore_n_8081610.html?utm_hp_ref=mostpopular

stardesk wrote:Didge, quoting you:  'What you need to ask yourself is why you look for reasons not to help them?
That alone spells out your reasoning behind your views Stardesk.'

I've already explained my reasons Didge. IE: Housing, employment, NHS, at the cost of UK tax and insurance payers, taking advantage of social services hand outs, and much more.  I'll help anyone in dire need, but thousands of them? NO.

OK? Does that explain my reasons?

Not many weeks ago there was a comment on the tv news about a moslem woman at the till/check-out in a supermarket, who refused to sell a customer bottles of wine! Is that the sign of things to come? Think about it Didge.

But our country can adpat as it has done for centuries Stardesk
Again you are looking for reason not to help, when it should be the opposite.
You were born into privalidge, which does not mean you can deny this to others Stardesk.
Nothing you did created the infrustructure you were born into..

The publicity you give this vile bitch - the more she thrives.

There really needs to be a ban on all topics regarding this person. You are falling in her trap. Well done.

I'm sorry my friend, but I have to contradict you. Over hundreds of years millions of people have worked hard and that work contributed to the civilization we are now reaping the benefits of. In this age, 2000 etc, people are still working hard, the benefits of which enhance our lives and that of generations which follow us. Each generation reaps the benefits of the previous one.

I've worked hard all my life, I've raised a family, had a mortgage, have a car, and all the modern gadgets and gizmose. Paid my taxes and insurance. Like most workers, I'm now reaping the benefits of my own hard work. Thousands of migrants coming here will also reap the benefits of our workforce, but haven't contributed to any benefits they'll receive. Is that fair?

I know I sound very selfish and unfeeling, but that's not the case. I'm looking at this problem with a national eye, but highlighting my personal situation is also a reflection of the national one, and to repeat myself, why should we give away our identity and benefits to thousands of non-contributary migrants.

stardesk wrote:I'm sorry my friend, but I have to contradict you. Over hundreds of years millions of people have worked hard and that work contributed to the civilization we are now reaping the benefits of. In this age, 2000 etc, people are still working hard, the benefits of which enhance our lives and that of generations which follow us. Each generation reaps the benefits of the previous one.

I've worked hard all my life, I've raised a family, had a mortgage, have a car, and all the modern gadgets and gizmose. Paid my taxes and insurance. Like most workers, I'm now reaping the benefits of my own hard work. Thousands of migrants coming here will also reap the benefits of our workforce, but haven't contributed to any benefits they'll receive. Is that fair?

I know I sound very selfish and unfeeling, but that's not the case. I'm looking at this problem with a national eye, but highlighting my personal situation is also a reflection of the national one, and to repeat myself, why should we give away our identity and benefits to thousands of non-contributary migrants.

You have little connection to these people Stardesk, so how can you gain off what you never did.
Not only that this country was built off the wealth of slavery and plunder, so again this country has gained its economic status based on doing wrongs from the past. The industrial revolution was only possible through this welath. You mnay have worked hard, but you are one individual, which again you like everyone else born here was born into privlidge. The fact is you like everyone else has an advantage from birth all created way before you were born. You can hardly take credit from people who's only connection is based on georgraphy.
I am looking at this problem with an ethical view.
We have plenty of room and the capability to adapt to more people

Agreed stardesk...


And dodge... the building up of this country by its people over the decades and centuries has been a continuous collective effort of The people and for the good of the collective British people And The passing on of this is not only just the normal and natural progression of things but also intended.


What was not and is not intended is to suddenly start giving it away to others who haven't bothered to sort their own shit out for themselves after all this time...

Quite agree Tommy.

You people know I don't usually swear in these discussions but for once I will: Oh for fuck sake, what the hell is Cameron playing at? Allowing up to 20,000 refugees to come here. Serve the silly buggers right for voting conservative. With Syria losing thousands of its people the way will be open for IS to wander in, unopposed, and take over. And I wonder how many Militants will pretend to be refugees and come here?

Didge, are you happy now, mate?

BTW, I see that hate crimes against Moslems are up by 70%. I did say quite some time ago in the discussions, that there would be an increase in attacks on Moslems. Not surprising is it.

I find, that people who live in areas with low-population of immigrants and always at the front with flags waving and saying "Come in!"

This is a really difficult topic for me, and one in which I'm torn down the middle; I want to help,these people but I know, and I KNOW this from LIVING IT, that we are overcrowded enough in some areas already.

eddie wrote:I find, that people who live in areas with low-population of immigrants and always at the front with flags waving and saying "Come in!"

This is a really difficult topic for me, and one in which I'm torn down the middle; I want to help,these people but I know, and I KNOW this from LIVING IT, that we are overcrowded enough in some areas already.

Yup

eddie wrote:I find, that people who live in areas with low-population of immigrants and always at the front with flags waving and saying "Come in!"

This is a really difficult topic for me, and one in which I'm torn down the middle; I want to help,these people but I know, and I KNOW this from LIVING IT, that we are overcrowded enough in some areas already.

The thing is Eddie... most of The immigrant communities in the already overcrowded areas are also against more immigration too!!!


It is not the case that if you are against continued mass immigration then you are just a racist etc... it is about recognising that we have been having too many people arriving for far too long and it is genuinely causing a lot of real problems!!!


We could easily take 20,000 Syrian refugees... if we limit numbers coming from elsewhere!!!


This reduction in numbers from elsewhere, we have already voted for and been promised...


So why not reduce immigration numbers by a couple hundred thousand from elsewhere as promised... then take 20,000 women and children from refugee camps instead...!!!???

Cuchulain wrote:

stardesk wrote:I'm sorry my friend, but I have to contradict you. Over hundreds of years millions of people have worked hard and that work contributed to the civilization we are now reaping the benefits of. In this age, 2000 etc, people are still working hard, the benefits of which enhance our lives and that of generations which follow us. Each generation reaps the benefits of the previous one.

I've worked hard all my life, I've raised a family, had a mortgage, have a car, and all the modern gadgets and gizmose. Paid my taxes and insurance. Like most workers, I'm now reaping the benefits of my own hard work. Thousands of migrants coming here will also reap the benefits of our workforce, but haven't contributed to any benefits they'll receive. Is that fair?

I know I sound very selfish and unfeeling, but that's not the case. I'm looking at this problem with a national eye, but highlighting my personal situation is also a reflection of the national one, and to repeat myself, why should we give away our identity and benefits to thousands of non-contributary migrants.

You have little connection to these people Stardesk, so how can you gain off what you never did.
Not only that this country was built off the wealth of slavery and plunder, so again this country has gained its economic status based on doing wrongs from the past. The industrial revolution was only possible through this welath. You mnay have worked hard, but you are one individual, which again you like everyone else born here was born into privlidge. The fact is you like everyone else has an advantage from birth all created way before you were born. You can hardly take credit from people who's only connection is based on georgraphy.
I am looking at this problem with an ethical view.
We have plenty of room and the capability to adapt to more people

+10000000000
Britain in particular (but not the only one) cannot claim to built on it's own sweat and blood alone.

eddie wrote:I find, that people who live in areas with low-population of immigrants and always at the front with flags waving and saying "Come in!"

This is a really difficult topic for me, and one in which I'm torn down the middle; I want to help,these people but I know, and I KNOW this from LIVING IT, that we are overcrowded enough in some areas already.

I find it to be the opposite those. although we are a generation further along the multiculturalism evolution, the most multicultural areas are populated by people raised in multicultural areas. I believe this changes your world view when you go to school and have childhood friends of many races.
there is a age thing, old people tend to be more racist and unnecessary fearful of other races and cultures.
in Sydney the most racist areas are the least multicultural areas... and there is not much in Sydney that is less multicultural than the more multicultural parts of London.

Rural Australia is a bit of mixed bag, some places are very Anglocentric others are quite multicultural

Tommy Monk wrote:

eddie wrote:I find, that people who live in areas with low-population of immigrants and always at the front with flags waving and saying "Come in!"

This is a really difficult topic for me, and one in which I'm torn down the middle; I want to help,these people but I know, and I KNOW this from LIVING IT, that we are overcrowded enough in some areas already.

The thing is Eddie... most of The immigrant communities in the already overcrowded areas are also against more immigration too!!!


It is not the case that if you are against continued mass immigration then you are just a racist etc... it is about recognising that we have been having too many people arriving for far too long and it is genuinely causing a lot of real problems!!!


We could easily take 20,000 Syrian refugees... if we limit numbers coming from elsewhere!!!


This reduction in numbers from elsewhere, we have already voted for and been promised...


So why not reduce immigration numbers by a couple hundred thousand from elsewhere as promised... then take 20,000 women and children from refugee camps instead...!!!???

OR you could DEAL WITH IT
the solution to over crowding is to build more housing not piss and moan about it.

You got plenty of members of lord that would be good to surrender their assets... they have stolen enough off tax payers.... wouldn't be hard to start with the worst offenders and the positive side effect would be less illegitimate expenses from the house of lords

veya_victaous wrote:

eddie wrote:I find, that people who live in areas with low-population of immigrants and always at the front with flags waving and saying "Come in!"

This is a really difficult topic for me, and one in which I'm torn down the middle; I want to help,these people but I know, and I KNOW this from LIVING IT, that we are overcrowded enough in some areas already.

I find it to be the opposite those.  although we are a generation further along the multiculturalism evolution, the most multicultural areas are populated by people raised in multicultural areas. I believe this changes your world view when you go to school and have childhood friends of many races.
there is a age thing, old people tend to be more racist and unnecessary fearful of other races and cultures.
in Sydney the most racist areas are the least multicultural areas... and there is not much in Sydney that is less multicultural than the more multicultural parts of London.

Rural Australia is a bit of mixed bag, some places are very Anglocentric others are quite multicultural

Pauline Hanson, founder of the racist one nation party is from Rockhampton
http://profile.id.com.au/rockhampton/population
about 83% is Aussie born Anglos
And they are one of the most racist areas in Australia
She says shit like

The former One Nation leader claimed that refugee children in Rockhamption high schools were abusing and making death threats to their teachers, while their parents were taking jobs off local residents.

“If you want to have peace and harmony in this country you cannot keep increasing the Muslims, Islam, in Australia ... we will have huge problems down the track,” she said.

to rile up the racist locals

Blacktown, My city only, about 25% are either fully Anglo or Aboriginal.
a further 40% were born here and may have 1 Anglo or Aboriginal parent.
leaving about 35% that are direct immigrants.

So it would be very Odd that these, I'm going to say make believe problems, exist in an area with so few but don't in an area so mixed.

stardesk wrote:Quite agree Tommy.

You people know I don't usually swear in these discussions but for once I will: Oh for fuck sake, what the hell is Cameron playing at? Allowing up to 20,000 refugees to come here. Serve the silly buggers right for voting conservative. With Syria losing thousands of its people the way will be open for IS to wander in, unopposed, and take over. And I wonder how many Militants will pretend to be refugees and come here?

Didge, are you happy now, mate?

BTW, I see that hate crimes against Moslems are up by 70%. I did say quite some time ago in the discussions, that there would be an increase in attacks on Moslems. Not surprising is it.

Hi Stardesk

Its called being humane Stardesk where again you seem to think you can play with the lives of people and only because you were born into privilege. This is all you care about not the pressing needs of hundreds of thousand but an increased risks some extremists might get through. Well let me make this very clear for you, the need of the refugees far exceeds that of you shitting your pants. If hate crimes are up it is because of people costantly spouting hate against others where people are doing littlew to counter it. Just because you see an increase does not make your views acceptable and never will. It astounds me that this coutry in its greatest hour of need would have collasped without the massive resources at their disposal from the collective resources of nations under its subjecation. People easily forget their freedom they have today was won by the massive amount of people from many nations that came to save our arses. Its time people like yourself recognised that and stopped being utterly selfish.

Tommy Monk wrote:

eddie wrote:I find, that people who live in areas with low-population of immigrants and always at the front with flags waving and saying "Come in!"

This is a really difficult topic for me, and one in which I'm torn down the middle; I want to help,these people but I know, and I KNOW this from LIVING IT, that we are overcrowded enough in some areas already.

The thing is Eddie... most of The immigrant communities in the already overcrowded areas are also against more immigration too!!!


It is not the case that if you are against continued mass immigration then you are just a racist etc... it is about recognising that we have been having too many people arriving for far too long and it is genuinely causing a lot of real problems!!!


We could easily take 20,000 Syrian refugees... if we limit numbers coming from elsewhere!!!


This reduction in numbers from elsewhere, we have already voted for and been promised...


So why not reduce immigration numbers by a couple hundred thousand from elsewhere as promised... then take 20,000 women and children from refugee camps instead...!!!???

Good post Tommy

And I never ever think I, or anyone else who feels this way, are racist.
Racist is a word bandied about when people have run out of logical arguments to counter thpoints you've just raised.

Yes, I think if the government were to decrease number elsewhere (as promised!) most people would be more then happy to welcome a large number of needy and desperate refugees.

veya_victaous wrote:

eddie wrote:I find, that people who live in areas with low-population of immigrants and always at the front with flags waving and saying "Come in!"

This is a really difficult topic for me, and one in which I'm torn down the middle; I want to help,these people but I know, and I KNOW this from LIVING IT, that we are overcrowded enough in some areas already.

I find it to be the opposite those.  although we are a generation further along the multiculturalism evolution, the most multicultural areas are populated by people raised in multicultural areas. I believe this changes your world view when you go to school and have childhood friends of many races.
there is a age thing, old people tend to be more racist and unnecessary fearful of other races and cultures.
in Sydney the most racist areas are the least multicultural areas... and there is not much in Sydney that is less multicultural than the more multicultural parts of London.

Rural Australia is a bit of mixed bag, some places are very Anglocentric others are quite multicultural

I was born and bred in a multicultural area Veya.

I think it's like many things; unless you live something, you can't have a real grasp of what's going on.

eddie wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:


The thing is Eddie... most of The immigrant communities in the already overcrowded areas are also against more immigration too!!!


It is not the case that if you are against continued mass immigration then you are just a racist etc... it is about recognising that we have been having too many people arriving for far too long and it is genuinely causing a lot of real problems!!!


We could easily take 20,000 Syrian refugees... if we limit numbers coming from elsewhere!!!


This reduction in numbers from elsewhere, we have already voted for and been promised...


So why not reduce immigration numbers by a couple hundred thousand from elsewhere as promised... then take 20,000 women and children from refugee camps instead...!!!???

Good post Tommy

And I never ever think I, or anyone else who feels this way, are racist.
Racist is a word bandied about when people have run out of logical arguments to counter thpoints you've just raised.

Yes, I think if the government were to decrease number elsewhere (as promised!) most people would be more then happy to welcome a large number of needy and desperate refugees.

Then you are naive as Tommy ias as about as racist as the nazis were and to claim otherwise is missing the reaosning behind people like Tommy, who is 100% as racist as they come, his arguments prove this. In your case its just selfishness.
Its people being selfish in the main at the rest of the day as they only care for themselves.
At the end of the day you forget how many people gloablly helped to make this country function.
Given a natural disater tomorrow Eddie, how do you really think you would fair?

eddie wrote:

veya_victaous wrote:

I find it to be the opposite those.  although we are a generation further along the multiculturalism evolution, the most multicultural areas are populated by people raised in multicultural areas. I believe this changes your world view when you go to school and have childhood friends of many races.
there is a age thing, old people tend to be more racist and unnecessary fearful of other races and cultures.
in Sydney the most racist areas are the least multicultural areas... and there is not much in Sydney that is less multicultural than the more multicultural parts of London.

Rural Australia is a bit of mixed bag, some places are very Anglocentric others are quite multicultural

I was born and bred in a multicultural area Veya.

I think it's like many things; unless you live something, you can't have a real grasp of what's going on.

As an Australian he has a better grasp of Multiculturalism than you

Cuchulain wrote:

eddie wrote:

veya_victaous wrote:

I find it to be the opposite those.  although we are a generation further along the multiculturalism evolution, the most multicultural areas are populated by people raised in multicultural areas. I believe this changes your world view when you go to school and have childhood friends of many races.
there is a age thing, old people tend to be more racist and unnecessary fearful of other races and cultures.
in Sydney the most racist areas are the least multicultural areas... and there is not much in Sydney that is less multicultural than the more multicultural parts of London.

Rural Australia is a bit of mixed bag, some places are very Anglocentric others are quite multicultural

I was born and bred in a multicultural area Veya.

I think it's like many things; unless you live something, you can't have a real grasp of what's going on.

As an Australian he has a better grasp of Multiculturalism than you

That's subjective.

eddie wrote:

Cuchulain wrote:




As an Australian he has a better grasp of Multiculturalism than you

That's subjective.

Factual

Australia was born and created from multiculturalism over many years.


Britains mass influx has beeen recent within the last 70 years.

Cuchulain wrote:

eddie wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:


The thing is Eddie... most of The immigrant communities in the already overcrowded areas are also against more immigration too!!!


It is not the case that if you are against continued mass immigration then you are just a racist etc... it is about recognising that we have been having too many people arriving for far too long and it is genuinely causing a lot of real problems!!!


We could easily take 20,000 Syrian refugees... if we limit numbers coming from elsewhere!!!


This reduction in numbers from elsewhere, we have already voted for and been promised...


So why not reduce immigration numbers by a couple hundred thousand from elsewhere as promised... then take 20,000 women and children from refugee camps instead...!!!???

Good post Tommy

And I never ever think I, or anyone else who feels this way, are racist.
Racist is a word bandied about when people have run out of logical arguments to counter thpoints you've just raised.

Yes, I think if the government were to decrease number elsewhere (as promised!) most people would be more then happy to welcome a large number of needy and desperate refugees.

Then you are naive as Tommy ias as about as racist as the nazis were and to claim otherwise is missing the reaosning behind people like Tommy, who is 100% as racist as they come, his arguments prove this. In your case its just selfishness.
Its people being selfish in the main at the rest of the day as they only care for themselves.
At the end of the day you forget how many people gloablly helped to make this country function.
Given a natural disater tomorrow Eddie, how do you really think you would fair?

I don't know how I would fare, as I don't know how you would, becaeue it's never happened?

I'm being selfish? Possibly. I care more about my children's future than anyone else's that's for sure!

Like I've said; some areas are seeing the impCt less than others.

If I didn't have children I'd probably be less selfish.

Having said all of that, I've no problem with regugees being given a home here, I've campaigned for it and argued for it all over Facebook, for example.
I just see both sides that's all.

eddie wrote:

Cuchulain wrote:

Then you are naive as Tommy ias as about as racist as the nazis were and to claim otherwise is missing the reaosning behind people like Tommy, who is 100% as racist as they come, his arguments prove this. In your case its just selfishness.
Its people being selfish in the main at the rest of the day as they only care for themselves.
At the end of the day you forget how many people gloablly helped to make this country function.
Given a natural disater tomorrow Eddie, how do you really think you would fair?

I don't know how I would fare, as I don't know how you would, becaeue it's never happened?

I'm being selfish? Possibly. I care more about my children's future than anyone else's that's for sure!

Like I've said; some areas are seeing the impCt less than others.

If I didn't have children I'd probably be less selfish.

Having said all of that, I've no problem with regugees being given a home here, I've campaigned for it and argued for it all over Facebook, for example.
I just see both sides that's all.

1) Do you not think you would be reliant on the help and generosity of others?

2) Still selfish they cannot function or you can without the help of others. If they took your view and thought as you did yours and other families would suffer. Think about that. Everything you obtain is not created by you is it?

3) Its nothing to do with having children or not, its about the need of everyone which does include you but you are a part of.

4) There is no two sides to this argument, the other side, is just "me, me, me" mentality

20,000 over 5 years is nothing. France will do more in one year; Germany over 40x that amount. These countries are not better or more capable of taking on those big numbers than the UK. Though their goverments are morally superior to ours it seems. Still, 20,000 is a lot better than was talked about this time last week...

We have empty buildings across the UK. We have room.

Eilzel wrote:20,000 over 5 years is nothing. France will do more in one year; Germany over 40x that amount. These countries are not better or more capable of taking on those big numbers than the UK. Though their goverments are morally superior to ours it seems. Still, 20,000 is a lot better than was talked about this time last week...

We have empty buildings across the UK. We have room.

Room for terrorists and benefits migrants but none for homeless veterans

smelly-bandit wrote:

Eilzel wrote:20,000 over 5 years is nothing. France will do more in one year; Germany over 40x that amount. These countries are not better or more capable of taking on those big numbers than the UK. Though their goverments are morally superior to ours it seems. Still, 20,000 is a lot better than was talked about this time last week...

We have empty buildings across the UK. We have room.

Room for terrorists and benefits migrants but none for homeless veterans

Arguing off one wrong does not mean you should not help but rectify the problem of homeless veterans

There is room for homeless vets as well. That they are homeless at all is a fault of the government.

Eilzel wrote:There is room for homeless vets as well. That they are homeless at all is a fault of the government.

But they are a secondary concern to you

In the last few days, you've a bigger deal about housing benefit migrants than you have in all the years of the homeless veteran scandal

Infact i have never heard you make so much as a peep about homeless veterans

smelly-bandit wrote:

Eilzel wrote:There is room for homeless vets as well. That they are homeless at all is a fault of the government.

But they are a secondary concern to you

In the last few days, you've a bigger deal about housing benefit migrants than you have in all the years of the homeless veteran scandal

Infact i have never heard you make so much as a peep about homeless veterans

OMG pathetic smelly even by your standards to use emotive reasoning where your claims on Eilzel are unfounded

Smelly, I'm not interested in your opinion on what I do and do not show concern for. I think both are worthy causes, but dying children trumps most things for me and is something I will definitely be more vocal about.

My response was to the idea we help one at the expense of another, which is simply wrong.

Eilzel wrote:Smelly, I'm not interested in your opinion on what I do and do not show concern for. I think both are worthy causes, but dying children trumps most things for me and is something I will definitely be more vocal about.

My response was to the idea we help one at the expense of another, which is simply wrong.

+100

Lol the give away is that they are not Muslims, can you guess why Dibs lol

Did you notice the part Non-Halal?
Could it be they are Christian?

eddie wrote:I don't mind if someone speaks their mind - but sometimes, it's not what we want to hear.

If she means what she says then she needs to own it, and explain herself.
If she doesn't, a public apology should be on its way.

She's a publicity whore and trying to be the UK's Ann Coulter.

I bet she doesn't actually believe what she says, but says stuff for shock value and to sell her column.

As they say, don't feed the troll.

That's all she is: a paid troll.

eddie wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:


The thing is Eddie... most of The immigrant communities in the already overcrowded areas are also against more immigration too!!!


It is not the case that if you are against continued mass immigration then you are just a racist etc... it is about recognising that we have been having too many people arriving for far too long and it is genuinely causing a lot of real problems!!!


We could easily take 20,000 Syrian refugees... if we limit numbers coming from elsewhere!!!


This reduction in numbers from elsewhere, we have already voted for and been promised...


So why not reduce immigration numbers by a couple hundred thousand from elsewhere as promised... then take 20,000 women and children from refugee camps instead...!!!???

Good post Tommy

And I never ever think I, or anyone else who feels this way, are racist.
Racist is a word bandied about when people have run out of logical arguments to counter thpoints you've just raised.

Yes, I think if the government were to decrease number elsewhere (as promised!) most people would be more then happy to welcome a large number of needy and desperate refugees.

Thanks Eddie... you know I talk sense... unlike dodge!


The simple answer is to have stricter limits on immigration numbers, as is what is overwhelmingly wanted by the British people, and was promised by govt and voted for again last time round.


This is our country and a democracy where this has been voted for.



Show me any previous election where anyone has actually voted for mass immigration...!?


Why don't the people who want to come here just build more in tIfor own countries and improve their own lives where they are...!?



Plus... we can't just keep on building more and think that solves the problem... Where does all the extra water/electricity/gas/food come from?

Where does all the extra waste go to?


What about the already overcrowded roads and transport systems?


Overcrowded schools and hospitals etc!?


Where do all the extra jobs/benefits/money come from!?


See...?


The simplest answer is just to strictly limit the numbers allowed to arrive and to remove more of those who are here illegally, overstayed visa etc, those foreign criminals, and those who have come here under the pretense of working but do not work.

lol you are a racist full stop and as seen you have no reasoning Tommy as seen from the many arguments.
You make hearsay arguments when many people do come here and make good lives.
She clearly has taken you onboard like a puppy, sad you are clearly not house trained and not likely to be
Again countries can adapt and Germany is putting us to shame over this

Tommy Monk wrote:

eddie wrote:

Good post Tommy

And I never ever think I, or anyone else who feels this way, are racist.
Racist is a word bandied about when people have run out of logical arguments to counter thpoints you've just raised.

Yes, I think if the government were to decrease number elsewhere (as promised!) most people would be more then happy to welcome a large number of needy and desperate refugees.

Thanks Eddie... you know I talk sense... unlike dodge!


The simple answer is to have stricter limits on immigration numbers, as is what is overwhelmingly wanted by the British people, and was promised by govt and voted for again last time round.


This is our country and a democracy where this has been voted for.



Show me any previous election where anyone has actually voted for mass immigration...!?


Why don't the people who want to come here just build more in tIfor own countries and improve their own lives where they are...!?



Plus... we can't just keep on building more and think that solves the problem... Where does all the extra water/electricity/gas/food come from?

Where does all the extra waste go to?


What about the already overcrowded roads and transport systems?


Overcrowded schools and hospitals etc!?


Where do all the extra jobs/benefits/money come from!?


See...?


The simplest answer is just to strictly limit the numbers allowed to arrive and to remove more of those who are here illegally, overstayed visa etc, those foreign criminals, and those who have come here under the pretense of working but do not work.

I hope that this helps.
http://www.newsfixboard.com/t11447-refugees-the-myths-and-fears

Dodge again can't argue the topic sensibly without the knee jerk response of calling anyone who is against mass immigration 'a racist'...



And Christie... my points are about the wider issues around mass immigration and The continuation of it...


We had over 600,000 immigrants arrive here last year...

Poor Tommy still cannot work out risks and worked out weighing up the needs of people. You certainly are way down the pecking order compared to refugee children.

The needs of people!?


THese people ase already in safe countries dodge!?


They don't have any needs to come here or go anywhere else in Europe... they don't NEED to... they just WANT to...!!!




Can you see the difference...!?



Or are you going to continue being willfuly blind to the facts!?

Ha ha ha ha so Tommy tries to deflect again and avoid the point


They are fleeing to countries that are excepting them which are safe

Some countries like Russia for example which you screwed up on are not accepting refugees


DOH

Tommy Monk wrote:The needs of people!?


THese people ase already in safe countries dodge!?


They don't have any needs to come here or go anywhere else in Europe... they don't NEED to... they just WANT to...!!!




Can you see the difference...!?



Or are you going to continue being willfuly blind to the facts!?

you won't get through to them , its only on here that people defend and accept these refugees while back in the real world everyone i have spoken to don't want them here .

Ahhh bless so Dibs does not have an answer to my previous question either.

I wonder why

Doh

I know dibs... good to see you and HF back and telling some inconvenient truths to the lefties!!!

Cuchulain wrote:Ahhh bless so Dibs does not have an answer to my previous question either.

I wonder why

Doh

stuff your questions up your arse I'm not interested in anything you have to say

Tommy Monk wrote:I know dibs... good to see you and HF back and telling some inconvenient truths to the lefties!!!

thanks

Cuchulain wrote:Ha ha ha ha so Tommy tries to deflect again and avoid the point


They are fleeing to countries that are excepting them which are safe

Some countries like Russia for example which you screwed up on are not accepting refugees


DOH

They have already fled tosafe countries who are accepting them dodge... they are already now in safe countries and don't NEED to flee any more.


They don't NEED to come to UK or Germany or France or Sweden etc... they just WANT to...!!!


Do you know the difference between WANT and NEED ... dodge!?

So Tommy is still evading the points










So much of a coward hee hee

I asked you the questions... you are the One avoiding the simple facts...!





Most amusing!!!

You have asked the same poor questions easily answered before ha ha ha


Its like talking to a two year ol


Laters Twatty, let me know when you have something intelligent to add.

I think I might have to wait a couple of decades as you certainly did not answer my points


So lets allow you the last word and make you look a prime wally

Still avoiding the points and question I see...


I will try again...





They have already fled tosafe countries who are accepting them dodge... they are already now in safe countries and don't NEED to flee any more.


They don't NEED to come to UK or Germany or France or Sweden etc... they just WANT to...!!!


Do you know the difference between WANT and NEED ... dodge!?


Well!!!???