# asylum seekers amnesty



## vlastan (May 6, 2002)

Good show from the government bastards. 15000 to be given amnesty now, so who knows how many more will be on their way soon. 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3210605.stm


----------



## vlastan (May 6, 2002)

Paul,

These people are illegal in the first place. People from the EU are not refugees nor are illegal to live or work within the EU. EU is becoming more like the United States of America, where people are free to move anywhere they feel.

I am not sure how these people have more skills than the average British person. Where did you get this information from?

The problem is that by giving amnesty now, it will open the flood gates for more to come and claim asylum. The UK appears to be the best country for these people to claim benefits and legal aid and live a care free life.

So, YES short term benefit is seen here, but long term is going to cause more problems.


----------



## paulb (May 6, 2002)

interesting Nick, that as someone who has benefited from the EU freedom of movement and employment rules, you seem to be so anti other people moving into this country.

The term asylum seekers has been invented by the government and media to sanitise the word refugees. These are people seeking refuge who have, often at great risk, travelled to another country, typically to escape danger or persecution.

Many of these people are skilled (the average skill level of a refugee arriving in Britain is higher than the average skill level within the British workforce) but are often restricted from working and forced to live of benefit (which many don't want to do). This 'amnesty' will allow many to actively contribute to our economy.

Paul


----------



## Nik-S3 (Nov 6, 2002)

> These are people seeking refuge who have, often at great risk, travelled to another country


 :



> Many of these people are skilled


 :

Just out of interest, do you live near one of the areas these people are being moved into? Doesnt sound like someone speaking from experience to me, at least not the experiences I've had


----------



## paulb (May 6, 2002)

Yes, I live near Oakington in Cambridgeshire. And whilst there are problems, most of the issues in my area come from the local shits who are born and bred British


----------



## andytt (Sep 25, 2002)

Born and bread British who are seeing little communities being built up around them where they don't speak English?...

By allowing an amnesty - I understand that it will allow them to contribute to the economy in taxes etc, but it will encourage the illegals to come in and hide for a few years untill the next one... solves one problem creates another?!

We'll never get rid of them until we take a firmer stance and tell the french fucks to stop throwing them through the tunnel!!

Or give them all shit paid jobs working on a tip, or working as a streetcleaner. - let them contribute to society that way! instead of giving them benefits and making people think they are sponging make them do work and people will be more accepting that they are willing to do work?? :-/


----------



## garyc (May 7, 2002)

Perhaps we should just gas them all and have done with it? :


----------



## vlastan (May 6, 2002)

> Perhaps we should just gas them all and have done with it? :


HEIL HITLER! ;D


----------



## W7 PMC (May 6, 2002)

> Perhaps we should just gas them all and have done with it? :


Excellent idea.

Even better idea, get them to start work on a new tunnel under the Atlantic. They'll soon get pissed off with the manual work, but the end result is they will have a new tunnel to wander through to the land of the free  ;D


----------



## r1 (Oct 31, 2002)

Vlastan - I'd be interested to hear your views on how these people should be dealt with...

Please bear in mind when answering that there are approx 500,000 here already and virtually all the minimum wage jobs in the SE are staffed by former / current asylum seekers.

As a point - I do agree that we are a soft touch but I can still empathise with them.


----------



## Kell (May 28, 2002)

On the one hand I feel genuine sympathy for the genuine cases, but on the other, it's well known that because Bitain is such a soft touch, the system is open to abuse.

Is it not hte case that asylum seekers have to seek asylum in the first neighbouring country they cross?

In which case, Britain is almost the last place any of these people should be allowed to reside.


----------



## vlastan (May 6, 2002)

> Vlastan - I'd be interested to hear your views on how these people should be dealt with...
> 
> Please bear in mind when answering that there are approx 500,000 here already and virtually all the minimum wage jobs in the SE are staffed by former / current asylum seekers.
> 
> As a point - I do agree that we are a soft touch but I can still empathise with them.


They should not be allowed entry to the UK of course.

When Albanians started to come in Athens, Athenians would go to the police and report them. They would get arrested and deported.

By no means the refugees are only a UK problem.


----------



## andytt (Sep 25, 2002)

Can we not just blame the french?

frikken cheese eating surrender monkeys!


----------



## r1 (Oct 31, 2002)

> They should not be allowed entry to the UK of course.
> 
> When Albanians started to come in Athens, Athenians would go to the police and report them. They would get arrested and deported.
> 
> By no means the refugees are only a UK problem.


Typical Sun reader response and the exact reason I specified that there are c500,000 here already. OK, now you know this what would you do? And don't just say that you wouldn't have let them in in the first place. :


----------



## Dotti (Mar 9, 2003)

Every single week I buy The Big Issue off of the same asylum seeker. 
He comes across a very reserved man and harmless and is always polite too


----------



## Dotti (Mar 9, 2003)

Oh and I forgot to mention that I always give him Â£1 for a coffee from wimpy


----------



## vlastan (May 6, 2002)

> Typical Sun reader response and the exact reason I specified that there are c500,000 here already. OK, now you know this what would you do? And don't just say that you wouldn't have let them in in the first place. :


Silly boy!! I have never bought the Sun in my whole life!! I only read Times and Sunday Times or the Financial Times.

I don't know where your 500k figure comes from. But it certainly seems excessive. The BBC was saying that 15k refugees will be given aylum at this stage. I guess the other 485k people have already been accepted or are illegal in the UK.


----------



## Dotti (Mar 9, 2003)

Oh I read The Sun.. it is my comic ;D


----------



## r1 (Oct 31, 2002)

> Silly boy!! I have never bought the Sun in my whole life!! I only read Times and Sunday Times or the Financial Times.
> 
> I don't know where your 500k figure comes from. But it certainly seems excessive. The BBC was saying that 15k refugees will be given aylum at this stage. I guess the other 485k people have already been accepted or are illegal in the UK.


And your solution is.......................


----------



## vlastan (May 6, 2002)

15k should have been deported and refused asylum.

Introduce more check controls at the places where refugees normally enter (harbours, airports etc)

Introduce a freephone line where we can report illegal immigrants

The main issue is that as the EU is expanding a lot of people will be allowed to move and claim benefits from the new "poor" countries. These will be legal, but hopefully will be coming over here to work and not claim benefits.


----------



## vlastan (May 6, 2002)

Finally some light at the end of the tunnel! 

Lets hope that these changes will become law very soon.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3216447.stm


----------



## mighTy Tee (Jul 10, 2002)

A large proportion of the Asylum Seekers are economic migrants. They are not in fear of their lives and see Britain as an easy touch.

In my home area - our Government wants to place 400 young male Asylum Seekers, whose case is being reviewed. They will be given Â£40 per week and allowed to roam freely in an area where there are a large number of retired and elderly residents.

And why do they get given permanent Asylum, for instance Croatia was unsafe 10 years ago, so I can understand why Croatians would seek asylum, but these Croatians now have a safe homeland, but choose to remain in the UK


----------



## andytt (Sep 25, 2002)

> Every single week I buy The Big Issue off of the same asylum seeker. Â
> He comes across a very reserved man and harmless and is always polite too Â


perhaps part of the same crowd that wrecked a 40million pound assylum centre eh? :-/


----------



## Dotti (Mar 9, 2003)

> perhaps part of the same crowd that wrecked a 40million pound assylum centre eh? Â :-/


Oh well if you can't beat em join em eh ;D


----------



## r1 (Oct 31, 2002)

> They will be given Â£40 per week and allowed to roam freely in an area where there are a large number of retired and elderly residents.


Innocent till proven guilty... ???


----------



## garyc (May 7, 2002)

What about using them for medical experiments?


----------



## Dotti (Mar 9, 2003)

Why use them, when we could just use Vlastan :-X


----------



## vlastan (May 6, 2002)

> Why use them, when we could just use Vlastan Â :-X


Are you trying to be funny? :-/


----------



## fastasflip (May 13, 2003)

All too intellectual for me as i read the Currant bun!

Send them all back were they came from, Britain has enough problems of it's own and i for one would rather see my taxes be spent elsewhere


----------



## vlastan (May 6, 2002)

> All too intellectual for me as i read the Currant bun!
> 
> Send them all back were they came from, Britain has enough problems of it's own and i for one would rather see my taxes be spent elsewhere


Hmm...which war will they start next? North Korea would be a nice place to drop some missiles!


----------



## mighTy Tee (Jul 10, 2002)

> Innocent till proven guilty... ???


Secure accomodation (not prison, but a compound where they have use of facilities) would not trouble those who are genuine and fleeing opression.

However well over 80% and probably 95% are economic migrants not opressed citizens of their home nation!


----------



## kingcutter (Aug 1, 2003)

send a couple of greater manchester police to round them up,i am sure they will treat them with the respect they deserve.


----------



## paulb (May 6, 2002)

> The main issue is that as the EU is expanding a lot of people will be allowed to move and claim benefits from the new "poor" countries. These will be legal, but hopefully will be coming over here to work and not claim benefits.


If that is your main issue, then I struggle with your complete lack of empathy. Did you not move from an EU country with a lower GDP per capita and are now employed in this country.

Why is it ok for you to be an economic migrant and not others?

As for being a soft touch, the UK lags behind the Netherlands, Germany, Belgium, Sweden and Denmark in the EU in terms of refugees taken per capita.

It is amazing how the bias of the Murdoch empire can have such a widespread influence on the UK population. Makes me wonder who is really in charge here?

As for the 'I read the Times not the Sun' bollocks, its filled with the same jingoistic, xenophobic bias...


----------



## sno (Jul 2, 2003)

all I have to add is..........

TAX, TAX, TAX

watch it grow...

fucking Labour Government...

Oh did I say that out loud and go down the politics line.
Tough...

TONY BLAIR...

FUCK OFF


----------



## mighTy Tee (Jul 10, 2002)

> all I have to add is..........
> 
> TAX, TAX, TAX
> 
> ...


SPOT ON

And despite paying in for my Pension all my working life that is gonna be worth f**k all as well, 'cause the money is better spent on giving Social Security to all these economic migrants


----------



## marksovereign (Sep 20, 2003)

Couple of points here !

1. Who the [email protected] wants to be part of the EU anyway - as per normal the french do whatever they want a chuck thAsylum Seekers over the Channel - Albanians, Croatians etc, etc have got to pass through an awful lot of Eu countries before they get here and if they are rigtful Asyluum seekers they should seek asylum in the first country they cross.
2. Why cant we just shut our borders to the constant tide of economic migrants who masquerade as asyluum seekers, why does it take so long to check up on a claim, and why are they released into the UK until the claim is settled, they shud be held in secure basic accomodation and their applications processed in 48 hrs, if they are rejected send straight back to France or from whence the entered Britain .

3. Stopp the blood sucking legal system from making money out of these processes, with constant appeals and reviews, all on legal aid, all paid for out of we the tax payers pocket.

I'm not against Asylum seekers- and if someone can demonstrate that they are being persecuted fair enough. But many of these people now claim asylum from now safe countries - and have paid to be shipped over here for a life on benefits Â grrrrrrrrrrrr
And as for those who traffic them ......................

Seriously we have got to get tough and soon - can you seriously see this government doing that ?

Hmmmmmmm now what about Unmarried teenage mothers and the workhouse concept, rather than free council Â flats and benefits.....................................................


----------



## garyc (May 7, 2002)

The Â£Â£s spent on immigration issues pales into insignificance compared to the Â£Â£s wasted on the extra 10,000 Whitehall hirees; the excessive amount of administrators hired into the NHS to 'measure'; the Â£Â£Â£s thrown at education with very little real benefit bar devalued qualifications and still more without any; not to mention the cost of overthrowing, invading and policing other sovereign territories; pointlessly digging up the roads; propping up of poorly managed transportation systems; the billions that Blair spends of our money on advertising TO US (Govt is single largest advertising spender in UK) - the list is endless but last and not least the vast amount of freeloaders and scroungers that we already support.

Wake up.  Â A few immigrants is the least of our economic worries.


----------



## marksovereign (Sep 20, 2003)

Gary
theres a bit of a common thread running through here wouldnt you say? Total fuck*ng incompetence !And there is no one prepared to set about sorting it out - The NHS, Education, Roads?transport, Benefits and Asylum seekers - they are all costing us the Tax payer and what do we get for our hard earned ? absolute bloody shambles.
Ive always reckoned you get back what you put in - not in the UK you dont - ive never claimed benefit of any kind even though I was made redundant recently - when I enquired i told i wasnt eleigible !!!!!!!! Not fucking eligible after 24 years of funding the system,then some sponger from Iraq, Croatia, Albania decides hed like a nice cosy life funded by the UK Benefits system, hops on a ferry or in the back of a truck and ends up with schooling,housing,benefits - AND I DONT FUCKING QUALIFY.

This Country is a soft touch run by Pollitically Correct, tree hugging administrators, until we sort it things will never change.

PS Whitehall is a drop in the ocean compared to the cost of the Asylum Seekers.

Right im now sitting in a corner quietly letting the blood pressure subside.


----------



## PaulS (Jun 15, 2002)

> Gary
> theres a bit of a common thread running through here wouldnt you say? Total fuck*ng incompetence !And there is no one prepared to set about sorting it out - The NHS, Education, Roads?transport, Benefits and Asylum seekers - they are all costing us the Tax payer and what do we get for our hard earned ? absolute bloody shambles.
> Ive always reckoned you get back what you put in - not in the UK you dont - ive never claimed benefit of any kind even though I was made redundant recently - when I enquired i told i wasnt eleigible !!!!!!!! Not fucking eligible after 24 years of funding the system,then some sponger from Iraq, Croatia, Albania decides hed like a nice cosy life funded by the UK Benefits system, hops on a ferry or in the back of a truck and ends up with schooling,housing,benefits - AND I DONT FUCKING QUALIFY.
> 
> ...


I could not agree more! Every time I see f*****g Blair, Brown or Prescott on the Tv waffling on about their latest achievements, my blood boils. What have they delivered - absolutely FA, apart from hundreds of tax increases! Â 

Do you think Mrs Thatcher would have let the 'asylum' system to become such a shambles, and allow an amnesty? She wouldn't have let 1 in, let alone 15,000!

Labour care more about their image and being politically correct, than looking after the country. Why does the number one priority always seem to be to sort out problems in _other_ countries (Iraq) or to spend millions of pounds supporting so called 'asylum' seekers? Â

[flame suit at the ready] I couldn't give a f**k about Asylum seekers or Iraq anymore. I would rather the Government spent some money on keeping one of the last symbols of British expertise flying - Concorde Â  Â


----------



## garyc (May 7, 2002)

OK folks listen up.

From National Financial Statistics available for all to see.

_source_ Â Blunkett.
2000/01
Immigrants cost in benefits: Â£28 billion.
Immigrants contributed in taxes: Â£31.2bn
Net contribution Â£2.4 Bn.

I don't see a major problem with that.

1 in 12 of population born overseas.

Additionally from Gov't records:2000/01

Total Social Security benefits mainly paid to non tax payers:
Â£103bn Â (1/2 of total gov't exchequer spend)

NHS Expenditure:
Â£50Bn Â - Getting better?

Education Spending:
Â£42bn Â - Getting better?

1 in 5 now works for the gov't and makes no contribution to the balance of payments.

354,000 new public sector jobs since 1998. 66,000 new nurses, 20,000 new docs no problem. Â What about the other 270,000?

Whitehall is NOT a drop in the ocean.

You lot are just pointing at the wrong culprits. :


----------



## marksovereign (Sep 20, 2003)

Wooooaaah Fella

Garry, Im impressed with stats and will sit down and have a look at them. However there is one immediate flaw in your arguement - theres a big difference between an immigrant and an illegal immigrant - from your figures you're saying Mr Sponging Albanian and his mates are contributing to the economy and we're actually in surplus !!!!!! 

I think you'll find that those figures relate to those immigrants with a right to settle, with jobs and money

As regards' Whitehall' the term in itself is misleading weve got to refer to NHS, Education, Transport etc - I take your point about the extra 270,000 jobs but that needs further investigation and breaking down.

My point was that there are no controls and no infrastructure anymore - the Asylum seeker stuff is the last straw, like i said before ive got no problem with anyone in trouble seeking asylum - thats the benefit of being a free country. its the fact we dont seem to want to distinguish the rights and the wrongs any more and no one is proud enough to stand up for the Uk taxpayer and say no - you dont qualify get back to france or wherever, instead we get embroiled in legal battles with the court of EU human rights when its other bloody EU countries who wont take their responsibilities under the various treaties which are the problem. Allied to the fact that the ones who do can make decisions about acceptability of cases within 48 hours !!! Why cant we do this ???
instead we feed them house them give them benefits because we're scared of breaching their EU human rights !!! theyve come to the UK, so why cant the UK make decisions without having to refer to Brussels?
I'll tell you why because we're absolutely spineless . If it was down to me we'd shgut the Tunnel and become the UK again or maybe even the 52nd US State, not beholden to a bunch of Europeans who couldnt thanks us enough for repelling the Kraut 50 years ago

Where did we go wrong ??? Enoch Powell was right
:'(


----------



## mighTy Tee (Jul 10, 2002)

> Immigrants cost in benefits: Â£28 billion.
> Immigrants contributed in taxes: Â£31.2bn
> Net contribution Â£2.4 Bn.


That is why in my local area where there is a proposed Asylum Centre, the immigrant population are probably more against the centre than I am. The local corner shop run by Indian friends are so against it, I almost thought she was more British than me. The local Indian Take Away displays more Anti Asylum Centre posters than most.

When the Asylum Centre was first proposed, I was afraid of offending my friends from the Asian community.

Their attidude to Asylum Seekers is that these people are economic migrants, who are looking to scounge off the state, whilst contributing nothing. Their words not mine!


----------



## garyc (May 7, 2002)

> Wooooaaah Fella
> 
> Garry, Im impressed with stats and will sit down and have a look at them. However there is one immediate flaw in your arguement - theres a big difference between an immigrant and an illegal immigrant - from your figures you're saying Mr Sponging Albanian and his mates are contributing to the economy and we're actually in surplus !!!!!!
> 
> ...


Well because 'they' are illegal, extimates of numbers are just that - and deflated or increased according to one's stance. Either way I'd be surprised if they form a significant % of those bone fide immigrants, so the surplus can contribute for a start.

Besides just maybe part of the rationale behind the amnesty is to crystalise the illegal numbers so that the govt can do their sums rather than all the conjecture and ignorance that we currently have about the actual numbers - such as that displayed on this thread. :-/

It's just an easy band wagon for the self righteous nazi xenophobes out there to jump on - many of whom are scrounging off the state and putting very little back in anyway. Perhaps they dn't want to have to share the welfare gravy train. I'd personally rather have a few illegal immigrants who want to be here and work than a load of baying right wing ignorami whom I'd happily export.


----------



## marksovereign (Sep 20, 2003)

Gary

Thanks for the reasoned debate .

I agree with a lot of what you say particularly i terms of the Xenophobia displayed from some quarters. Economic Migrants, Asylum Seekers call them whatever, the problem is we just dont know whats coming in and how to control or administer it. There will always be a place for true Asylum seekers, and always should be, the problem is at the moment we are incapable of sorting the wheat from the chaff effectively. Whats even more galling is that The Eu is trying to force our hands about who and what we take, when other member states just pass the problem on.

There are no proper figures in terms of number or cost just the ones awaiting conformation of status who are 'legal' asylum or Economic migrants.

How did we manage to get in such a mess over what should be a quick and easy problem - There is one thing for sure Labour are playing for votes on this one, let 15,000 in Â - it just moves the problem further on as there is still no addressing it .

I also agree that there are plenty of homegrown spongers who will probably seek deny the rights of Asylum seekers - i wonder what thart charming woman off Wife Swaps view is?


----------



## garyc (May 7, 2002)

> I also agree that there are plenty of homegrown spongers who will probably seek deny the rights of Asylum seekers - i wonder what thart charming woman off Wife Swaps view is?


That's the piece of shit I had in mind 

I'd ship that bitch, her brood, any friends, and anyone who even vaguely reminded me of their ilk, off to downtown Bhagdad tomorrow into a tenement.

There must be 1000s like them here. All social victims of course : Out they go. Oh and I'd conviscate all of their western scrounged chattels and incinerate them. ;D

See, easy to get all draconian. Fun too


----------



## donny (Sep 5, 2003)

How about the latest then..Iraq family now living in the UK since the war is going to try and sue the MoD for killing some of their family in a bombing raid

Probably living on handouts from social services and getting legal aid to do it 

Ship the fuckers out o here


----------



## donny (Sep 5, 2003)

Shame we (airforces) missed the rest of them


----------



## marksovereign (Sep 20, 2003)

Gary, I can just see her in a Yashmak with her hair extension !!! ;D


----------

