No wonder they ****ing flock here. 
How the hell can army barracks be wrong !
- Thread starter gasbanni
- Start date
Sponsored Links
Am I the only one that doesn't like terms like 'flock'? The implication that another group of people are unthinking animals hasn't historically had good outcomes.No wonder they ****ing flock here.
A church congregation is also a flock. That doesn’t make them animals. Brits 'flock' to the Spanish Costa’s in the holiday period. That doesn’t make them animals. You’re probably right, may be only you that doesn’t like the term.
What word would you use to describe groups of people that come to another country in large numbers?
What word would you use to describe groups of people that come to another country in large numbers?
Sponsored Links
People
"No wonder they 'people' here" doesn’t sound right.
- Joined
- 9 May 2020
- Messages
- 7,395
- Reaction score
- 136
- Country
Well it's better than the words that Mottie usually uses, like hordes and invaders, etc.
Earth to mottie...
Sangette was closed many years ago...
But I guess it takes rather a long time for real news to filter through to them folks in essex
Are people really saying the term flock is now racist. Jesus wept. As Mottie rightly said it's an agreeable term in all other forms, but not when people have a different skin colour it seems.
The barracks they stay in is only for a short period of time, whilst they are processed.
The conditions are far from squalid, ok they aren't hotels or homes but they are not squalid.
I've stayed in and paid for hostels in worse conditions than they are being held in.
It is a truly barmy decision.
It's not like they are packed in like sardines, with no clean water or hygiene facilities, they are getting fed decent meals etc it's a damn site better than they managed on their own.
The barracks they stay in is only for a short period of time, whilst they are processed.
The conditions are far from squalid, ok they aren't hotels or homes but they are not squalid.
I've stayed in and paid for hostels in worse conditions than they are being held in.
It is a truly barmy decision.
It's not like they are packed in like sardines, with no clean water or hygiene facilities, they are getting fed decent meals etc it's a damn site better than they managed on their own.
- Joined
- 22 Jul 2016
- Messages
- 5,878
- Reaction score
- 1,081
- Country
Has anybody here who is defending the barracks actually read the report and the judgement?
Public Health England warned that the property was unsafe.
"One of the crucial questions about Napier is why it was allowed to open in the way it did, given Public Health England (PHE) had warned the Home Office the dorms would not be suitable.
During the High Court hearing in April, there was no witness statement from PHE or Clearsprings - the Home Office contractor running the site - about how a plan was developed to manage Covid-19 risks.
The judge found civil servants appreciated the risks existed, but it's not clear how they took on board the "significant problem" PHE warned of, given they also needed to get the best value of money out of the site.
The "bottom line", said the judge, was the arrangements were contrary to PHE advice and did not even implement measures which the Home Secretary herself had apparently regarded as desirable and feasible."
According to a resident, there was no hot water, no electricity, and one shower between 100 people
The government effectively falsely imprissioned the residents. The rules say that they should have been free to come and go but they were not
Public Health England warned that the property was unsafe.
"One of the crucial questions about Napier is why it was allowed to open in the way it did, given Public Health England (PHE) had warned the Home Office the dorms would not be suitable.
During the High Court hearing in April, there was no witness statement from PHE or Clearsprings - the Home Office contractor running the site - about how a plan was developed to manage Covid-19 risks.
The judge found civil servants appreciated the risks existed, but it's not clear how they took on board the "significant problem" PHE warned of, given they also needed to get the best value of money out of the site.
The "bottom line", said the judge, was the arrangements were contrary to PHE advice and did not even implement measures which the Home Secretary herself had apparently regarded as desirable and feasible."
According to a resident, there was no hot water, no electricity, and one shower between 100 people
The government effectively falsely imprissioned the residents. The rules say that they should have been free to come and go but they were not
Perhaps the answer would be to give them all a detached house each. Would that suit his lordship?
Exactly. As economic migrants they can't do it for themselves. They've come here for the British taxpayer (ie. us) to do it for them. They're looking to freeload and trade up, and barracks aren't quite what they were promised in the British paradise where everything's free.
Sponsored Links
