Flags soon escalated ... Rape attack on young Sikh womnan

[Lirefighter]

the perpetrators allegedly told the woman during the attack: "You don't belong in this country, get out."

One of the men is described as having a shaved head, of heavy build, and was reported to be wearing a dark coloured sweatshirt and gloves.

Police appeal after woman raped in 'racially aggravated attack' in West Midlands

The Sikh Federation (UK) said the perpetrators allegedly told the woman: "You don't belong in this country, get out."

news.sky.com

Hmmm. Could be wrong, but definitely getting a whiff of Jussie with this for some reason

 

[Harry Bloomfield]

White = decent law abiding salt of the earth people
Non white = the opposite

It's not quite as black and white as that, but...

White = tends to be for the most part British and mostly civilised to European standards, and ethics.
Black = or at least the boat immigrants, mostly young males, with very strange living habits, from third world, backward countries, with very different standards to those of the UK. Mostly seeking their fortunes, whilst living at great expense of the tax paying hardworking British public expense. All taking a massive advantage of the rules, set up to look after asylum seekers, which they are simply not.

The present situation, would not be acceptable, even if the state looked after our own homeless, and unfortunates - but the state totally ignores our own.

 

[Notch7]

even if the state looked after our own homeless, and unfortunates - but the state totally ignores our own.

It’s interesting how the right wing care about homeless and unfortunates when discussing asylum seekers.

But when not discussing asylum seekers, they consider homeless and unfortunates to be benefit scroungers.

 

[carmanmemoranda]

I don't know what you're talking about. You claimed I said immigrants are to blame. I didn't. That's all there is to it.

Go back and read EXACTLY what you wrote. You put the connection in, I just highlighted it.

And for the record, I have seen no major protest against immigrants in general.

Really?

Immigration policy, yes. Overpopulation, yes. Illegal immigrants, yes.

And you can show this is seperate?

Legal immigrants, no.

Really?

Talking about being honest, have you ever asked yourself how many real refugees we could help - women, children, families fleeing persecution and death - if we didn't open our arms to illegal males aged 20 - 40 who come over here solely to improve their own situation at the expense of everyone else? Again, I don't blame the individuals (unless they commit crime, obviously) because our government facilitates and encourages them.

I'm not in favour of these arriving by boat, but do you have a coherent policy of stopping them, or speeding up the process? It's all I'm asking for.

Have you ever thought about who is negatively affected by illegal immigration? It's not the middle-classes who have mobility and opportunity, it's the poor working class and the settled immigrants who came here legally, contributed, did everything the right way and now find that they have no housing, skyrocketing local crime and can't even get a GP appointment or a dentist. The government might as well spit in their faces into the same bargain.

And where have I supported such immigration?

Please don't be like all the others, and recognise that asking for a coherent policy is different to open welcoming arms for all. it's nothing of the sort.

 

[Deleted member 317777]

So why include the part that I highlighted?

You are deliberately trying to pretend that it's 2 different things.

Protest at the Government, by all means. Protest at immigrants by all means.

But try and be honest about it.

Read the sentence before the section you highlighted!!

You are a terrible person to try and debate with.

You misunderstand a post and twist it around!! Thank you for putting me on ignore.

 

[Si_]

Go back and read EXACTLY what you wrote. You put the connection in, I just highlighted it.

Yes, I said it's the fault of the government. Why not just read what I write?

I'm not in favour of these arriving by boat, but do you have a coherent policy of stopping them, or speeding up the process? It's all I'm asking for.

What do you mean, it's 'all you're asking for'? You never mentioned it. If you'd have asked I'd have told you.

I say the solution is very simple. We take the £10bn we spend on hotels and processing expenses for illegals (a conservative figure), and give 10% of it to the French. In return, we ask only that the French allow our troops to be stationed on their beaches to prevent a single boat from crossing the Channel. Simple as that. The French free up their resources, do nothing, and get paid for it, we pay out a fraction of what we do currently have zero illegals arriving.

 

[mitch66]

I'm not claiming anything, just pointing out the item on a list that looks out-of-date to me.

Smooth.

 

[denso13]

I say the solution is very simple. We take the £10bn we spend on hotels and processing expenses for illegals (a conservative figure), and give 10% of it to the French. In return, we ask only that the French allow our troops to be stationed on their beaches to prevent a single boat from crossing the Channel. Simple as that. The French free up their resources, do nothing, and get paid for it, we pay out a fraction of what we do currently have zero illegals arriving.

The French public need to buy into this. I don't think that saying, you keep them all and we take none, will be acceptable to them. Let's see.

 

[Si_]

The French public need to buy into this. I don't think that saying, you keep them all and we take none, will be acceptable to them. Let's see.

If the government was serious about reducing immigration (which of course they're not) then they'd long since have at least tried. I've never heard it brought up in discussion, let alone proposed as policy. It's just something I thought of. Instead what do we get? Rwanda. A 'gang initiative'. A ban on advertising Channel crossings. If it wasn't so unfunny it would be funny.

 

[denso13]

Sunak offered to pay Macron to take the boat people back. He said no.

 

[carmanmemoranda]

Yes, I said it's the fault of the government. Why not just read what I write?

It's not Government stuff, you are just trying to correlate the 2 differnt aspects

What do you mean, it's 'all you're asking for'? You never mentioned it. If you'd have asked I'd have told you.

It's all I've ever wanted.

I say the solution is very simple. We take the £10bn we spend on hotels and processing expenses for illegals (a conservative figure), and give 10% of it to the French. In return, we ask only that the French allow our troops to be stationed on their beaches to prevent a single boat from crossing the Channel. Simple as that. The French free up their resources, do nothing, and get paid for it, we pay out a fraction of what we do currently have zero illegals arriving.

Such lazy rhetoric.

These soldiers, do what, and how ? Shoot people if they swarm past them onto boats? Shout at them maybe? demand they row back to france ?

Much much better to have a better and efficient system to allow applications, and process, and return. But that needs co-operation. This really isn't just a UK issue, you do understand that ?

But I see how the slogans work. Stop the boats ! Stop the boats !

 

[MNW67]

I say the solution is very simple. We take the £10bn we spend on hotels and processing expenses for illegals (a conservative figure), and give 10% of it to the French. In return, we ask only that the French allow our troops to be stationed on their beaches to prevent a single boat from crossing the Channel. Simple as that. The French free up their resources, do nothing, and get paid for it, we pay out a fraction of what we do currently have zero illegals arriving.

The French would never go for that.

Do you have any other ideas. Would you like to give "push back" a go. I think Reform were in favour at one time, but it wasn't mentioned in their recent plan.

 

[Si_]

Sunak offered to pay Macron to take the boat people back. He said no.

I never mentioned taking them back. I said prevent them leaving France in the first place, something that Macron agreed to, although to negligible effect.

 

[carmanmemoranda]

I never mentioned taking them back. I said prevent them leaving France in the first place, something that Macron agreed to, although to negligible effect.

Againm. How? Exactly

 

[Si_]

It's not Government stuff, you are just trying to correlate the 2 differnt aspects

It's all I've ever wanted.

Such lazy rhetoric.

These soldiers, do what, and how ? Shoot people if they swarm past them onto boats? Shout at them maybe? demand they row back to france ?

Much much better to have a better and efficient system to allow applications, and process, and return. But that needs co-operation. This really isn't just a UK issue, you do understand that ?

But I see how the slogans work. Stop the boats ! Stop the boats !

If you think I'm going to validate that puerile nonsense with a considered reply, think again. Grow up.