The Bell hotel. Looks like it’s set a precedent.

[Mottie]

If you accept or are happy with them being here then why would you move if they lived next door? It makes no sense

…unless you were a nimby.

 

[MNW67]

If you accept or are happy with them being here then why would you move if they lived next door? It makes no sense

My point was that it might not be the asylum seekers that somebody has a problem with. But living next to an HMO of any sort which adjoins your house.

 

[yorksbuilder]

You mean you want to turn the UK into a third world war torn shít hole?

Parts of London, Birmingham, Manchester, Bradford are already. Enough is enough

 

[ReganAndCarter]

2) a load of migrants

Glad that even you don't pretend they're asylum seekers any more.

 

[ReganAndCarter]

So come on, how does the UK govt stop them?

Perhaps the same way Australia did.

 

[Deleted member 317777]

My point was that it might not be the asylum seekers that somebody has a problem with. But living next to an HMO of any sort which adjoins your house.

You’re probably right.

But I think the fact the uk is spending billions on immigrants makes it a little worse. Or at least for some.

Having streets full of immigrants free loading doesn’t seem fair to me.

 

[MNW67]

Perhaps the same way Australia did.

Do you know what worked in Australia. It might not be what you think.

 

[noseall]

Stop swerving

I'm not, you are. Go back to your original statement (post #125) and follow the conversation from there. No NIMBY-ism from me.

You say they are welcome

Wrong.

and we should accept them

If they are genuine refugee/asylum claimants with no safe place to reside - yes.

but only as long as it’s others that have to put up with them and not you.

Oh, you mean the super-tolerant, flag shagging Essex KKK Chapter?


Please dont lie about my posts.

 

[Notch7]

Perhaps the same way Australia did.

Typical pointless comment




refugee boats have to travel 1700 KMs to get to Australia

Australia sent the ones that did get there to Nauru….at enormous cost.


The situations have no equivalence

 

[Notch7]

Glad that even you don't pretend they're asylum seekers any more.

What is like like being so narrow minded and bigoted as ReganAndCarter?

 

[Mottie]

I'm not, you are. Go back to your original statement (post #125) and follow the conversation from there. No NIMBY-ism from me.

Wrong.

If they are genuine refugee/asylum claimants with no safe place to reside - yes.

Oh, you mean the super-tolerant, flag shagging Essex KKK Chapter?


Please dont lie about my posts.

Swerving nimby.

 

[denso13]

Perhaps the same way Australia did.

Yes, by working with other countries to solve the problem. I've said that for a while now but some think we can go it alone.

 

[Notch7]

You asked what we could do. I told what we could start off with.

Since you can’t answer, you must agree that the British govt have no control over people leaving French coast in small boats.

So therefore you accept that the numbers arriving in the U.K. is not the fault of the govt.

 

[Notch7]

Swerving nimby.

Mottie is upset because he been proven WRONG.

Reform voters are fragile little snowflakes

 

[Mottie]

Since you can’t answer, you must agree that the British govt have no control over people leaving French coast in small boats.

In that case, our control should start from the halfway point in the channel.