New Asylum Seeker Housing Plans

[aveatry]

Many asylum seekers are children.

Asylum seekers are in danger from xenophobes and racists.
View attachment 417786

Merseyside Police release more photos over Southport and Liverpool riots

Police say the eight men "need to make themselves known as soon as possible" to help investigations.

www.bbc.co.uk

View attachment 417787

Well Im afraid old chum that the government have confirmed that asylum seekers are a threat to children.

 

[King Billy]

Well Im afraid old chum that the government have confirmed that asylum seekers are a threat to children.

More unsupported racist propaganda.

You do need to be afraid, afraid of your own bigotry, it's consuming you.

 

[aveatry]

More unsupported racist propaganda.

You do need to be afraid, afraid of your own bigotry, it's consuming you.

Standard responce from the forum nut ---- Its actually a Labour policy. This is a clear admission that the government think that asylum seekers are a threat to children.

Shabana Mahmood bans all asylum seekers from locations close to schools and nurseries​

Shabana Mahmood bans all asylum seekers from locations close to schools and nurseries - London Business News | Londonlovesbusiness.com

Labour restricts asylum seekers from new-build homes following backlash over plans in rural Shropshire's Stoke Heath.

londonlovesbusiness.com

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2026/07/01/mahmood-ban-asylum-seekers-housed-near-schools/

 

[aveatry]

THEY DON’T LIKE IT UP UM
Oxford’s Stand Up To Racism Refugees Welcome crowd have launched a petition against an asylum camp right on their doorstep in Bicester. Refugees welcome errr -- but not in our posh backyard.
That's right - the very same organisation that accuse anyone who objects to asylum accommodation of being "far-right," "racist,"

 

[King Billy]

This is a clear admission that the government think that asylum seekers are a threat to children.

It's nothing of the sort. It's simply the government responding to public concerns.
You and the typical right wing media are adding 2 + 2 and getting 7 because you're racist.

If the government banned wind turbines in city centres, it wouldn't mean the government think they're a danger to people.

 

[King Billy]

THEY DON’T LIKE IT UP UM
Oxford’s Stand Up To Racism Refugees Welcome crowd have launched a petition against an asylum camp right on their doorstep in Bicester. Refugees welcome errr -- but not in our posh backyard.
That's right - the very same organisation that accuse anyone who objects to asylum accommodation of being "far-right," "racist,"

Have you looked at their concerns.
1. They don't think it's sensible to house asylum seekers in isolated rural surroundings because

• a) there's little or no infrastructure to support them,
  b) there's no opportunity to integrate them into the community.

They're also concerned about right wing violent protests.

 

[aveatry]

It's nothing of the sort. It's simply the government responding to public concerns.
You and the typical right wing media are adding 2 + 2 and getting 7 because you're racist.

your sick head go's straight to the racism card every time doesn’t it- not one post of mine is racist --- go and find one, that should provide you with 30 mins of something to do in your long days of boredom in your cell.

If the government banned wind turbines in city centres, it wouldn't mean the government think they're a danger to people.

Yes it would and they are.

 

[aveatry]

Have you looked at their concerns.
1. They don't think it's sensible to house asylum seekers in isolated rural surroundings because

• a) there's little or no infrastructure to support them,
  b) there's no opportunity to integrate them into the community.

That is exactly the same reasons that the so-called racists have been saying when they protest

They're also concerned about right wing violent protests.

What a perthitic excuse. They are just hypocrites - they dont like it in their (very nice) back yard.

 

[King Billy]

your sick head

And you immediately reach for the abusive button, because your intelligent discussion is exhausted.

Explain to me why I should continue to discuss issues with someone who so reactively responds with abuse?

go's straight to the racism card every time doesn’t it- not one post of mine is racist ---

I didn't say your posts were racists, I said your and the typical right wing media are racist.
That's a description of your attitude, not a description of your comments.
As usual, along with resorting to abuse, you've failed to comprehend my comment and added 2+2 to get 7.

 

[King Billy]

That is exactly the same reasons that the so-called racists have been saying when they protest

What is a so-called racist?

What a perthitic excuse. They are just hypocrites - they dont like it in their (very nice) back yard.

You didn't read their petition, then?
Or you didn't believe them?

 

[aveatry]

And you immediately reach for the abusive button, because your intelligent discussion is exhausted.
Explain to me why I should continue to discuss issues with someone who so reactively responds with abuse?

Then please don't reply - no one is forcing you - Nutter

I didn't say your posts were racists, I said your and the typical right wing media are racist.

because you're racist.

You really dont know what you are tapping out on your keyboard do you ---- NURSE!

 

[King Billy]

Then please don't reply - no one is forcing you - Nutter

I reserve the right, as it I feel the need, to respond to your nonsensical posts, expose your insistence for others to disclose their personal information and respond to your imagined inventions to fill in the blanks when they refuse, and to ask you to explain your comments and to ridicule them when they're based on incorrect assumptions.

You really dont know what you are tapping out on your keyboard do you ---- NURSE!

You ought to be able to differentiate between criticism of your comments and criticism of your attitude. But alas I fear you'll continue to conflate the two because it suits your abusive nature.

Your comments are easily phrased to avoid any overt racist comments but your attitude shines through clear and bright.

 

[diy_fun_uk]

U turn.

Labour U-turns on 'Migrant St' newbuilds

No fewer than 83 asylum seekers were due to take up residence in 21 new homes worth £250,000 apiece that had initially been earmarked for much-needed social housing.

www.dailymail.com

'A Home Office spokesperson said: 'New homes should never house asylum seekers. The Home Secretary has directly intervened to stop migrants being moved into the Stoke Heath development and no asylum seekers remain on site.'

'... the Daily Mail can now reveal that the initial decision to turn the new estate in Stoke Heath over to migrants was made despite the fact that 131 veterans are waiting on Shropshire Council's register for social housing, with seven making homelessness applications.

This total – obtained via a Freedom of Information request – far exceeds the number of asylum seekers who would have moved into the £250,000 homes in Stoke Heath.

While ministers have now 'put a halt' to housing the asylum seekers in the village's new-builds, veterans have torn into the Government for seemingly prioritising asylum seekers over those who have served their country.

Stu Mendelson, a former Royal Engineer, told the Daily Mail: 'The debate over Stoke Heath shouldn't overshadow the veterans already waiting for housing in Shropshire. Armed Forces Day has just passed.

'Now is the time to ask whether we're doing enough for those who've already served.'

 

[King Billy]

U turn.

Labour U-turns on 'Migrant St' newbuilds

No fewer than 83 asylum seekers were due to take up residence in 21 new homes worth £250,000 apiece that had initially been earmarked for much-needed social housing.

www.dailymail.com

'A Home Office spokesperson said: 'New homes should never house asylum seekers. The Home Secretary has directly intervened to stop migrants being moved into the Stoke Heath development and no asylum seekers remain on site.'

'... the Daily Mail can now reveal that the initial decision to turn the new estate in Stoke Heath over to migrants was made despite the fact that 131 veterans are waiting on Shropshire Council's register for social housing, with seven making homelessness applications.

This total – obtained via a Freedom of Information request – far exceeds the number of asylum seekers who would have moved into the £250,000 homes in Stoke Heath.

While ministers have now 'put a halt' to housing the asylum seekers in the village's new-builds, veterans have torn into the Government for seemingly prioritising asylum seekers over those who have served their country.

Stu Mendelson, a former Royal Engineer, told the Daily Mail: 'The debate over Stoke Heath shouldn't overshadow the veterans already waiting for housing in Shropshire. Armed Forces Day has just passed.

'Now is the time to ask whether we're doing enough for those who've already served.'

It's an easy and a lazy argument to make: "them or us".
It's different organisations that are responsible for housing the various groups.

In the UK, housing for military veterans is a shared responsibility between the Ministry of Defence (MOD) during the transition, local councils (local authorities), and specialized military charities. Veterans are legally protected under the Armed Forces Covenant so that they are not disadvantaged when seeking housing.

The UK Home Office is legally responsible for housing asylum seekers who would otherwise be destitute while awaiting a decision on their claim.

 

[aveatry]

Your comments are easily phrased to avoid any overt racist comments

Good - I see you checked and found NO racist post of mine. - Back in your cell you go - nutter