Jump to content

Recommended Posts

The Gov is in a position to continue or end lockdown in the safest manner, based on the scientific advice. It's in a position to stop illegal immigrants getting into the UK and deporting any that do. It's in a position to end the nonsense of the N/I protocol being inflicted by the EU.  But it's not doing so, hence the criticism; the tragedy of course, is that there's no other alternative.      :rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 62
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Let me state the obvious - on this subject, you’re an idiot Obs!   I don’t care what you think, that is personal and it’s directed right at you,.  Up til now you have been a joke on this forum, but en

You stay hiding behind your settee being guided by "opinion polls 🙄" Obs. In the real world people will go back to normal life, and not before time. I think it's you that needs to get out 🤣🤣.

Eventually they will get majority global coverage with vaccines,  there maybe a weakening in new variants,  most folk will retain new safety habits - so it will end eventually, but not yet.   If we sa

I can see the alternative of a lot of civil disobedience coming down the road in the near future.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Observer II said:

The Gov is in a position to continue or end lockdown in the safest manner, based on the scientific advice. It's in a position to stop illegal immigrants getting into the UK and deporting any that do. ....

end lockdown in the safest manner, based on the scientific advice

It is trying to do that, The problem is you seem to want positive action and to follow the best scientific advice at the same time. The best scientific advice is not clear to the best action is doing nothing, You do not want to follow scientific advice at all you just want to follow the scientific advice you like and have more restrictions. 

What action should the government take on stopping immigrants after they have left France. We have a UN treaty obligation to ensure that they are not bona-fide refugees before returning then to anywhere. The lose "ID" the task is not easy or quick. You appear to favour just taking them back to France with no questions asked, but France didn't want to take them in the first place and doesn't want them back so we have to send them somewhere else but where do these unidentifiable and uncooperative people come from? Your logic is unsustainable at best.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The majority of scientist currently favour caution, which doesn't mean unlocking yet.😷    Migrant boats can be grappled and taken back to a French beach (or nearest French port as per the law), instead of which the UKBF are actually picking them up in French waters and taking them to Dover - crazy. :rolleyes:     If we can arrange a fleet of boats to evacuate 300,000 troops from Dunkirk in 1940; I'm sure we can arrange a picket line of boats, just outside French territorial waters, to drag these migrants back to "the nearest (French) Port", in 2021.   😠

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Observer II said:

The majority of scientist currently favour caution, which doesn't mean unlocking yet.😷    Migrant boats can be grappled and taken back to a French beach (or nearest French port as per the law), instead of which the UKBF are actually picking them up in French waters and taking them to Dover - crazy. :rolleyes:     If we can arrange a fleet of boats to evacuate 300,000 troops from Dunkirk in 1940; I'm sure we can arrange a picket line of boats, just outside French territorial waters, to drag these migrants back to "the nearest (French) Port", in 2021.   😠

Science doesn't work by simple majority or consensus - that is also why climate change is total BS. What and whose law would that be? It sounds like piracy. UKBF are investigating that allegation by the way, it could turn out to be untrue. As for Dunkirk analogies, except in your head we are not at war with France or an occupying power in France!

Get a grip on reality.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sure the civil service thinks like you, thus part the reason HMG can't make any headway on these issues.    The Home Office was deemed unfit for purpose decades ago, and is probably now infested with woke liberals.   SAGE contains scientists, presumably the PM listens to "majority" advice from them.   No not "piracy";  International Law; any sea rescuers should be escorted to the "nearest Port";   therefore, if the UKBF/RN intercept these migrants, just outside French territorial waters, the nearest Port would be French.   Any Country aiding and abetting an invasion of our Country, could be described as "at war";   not that being "at war" has anything to do with having the capability to intercept these migrant boats - all that's required is the political will, which to-date is sadly lacking.    The reality is, that we are allowing these migrants to illegally enter the UK - and that's the reality that Gov must get a grip of.    😠

Link to post
Share on other sites

Obs,

The only consensus I have seen in SAGE documents is how to assess the various way of measuring R, that is to say how to interpret uncertainty in the metrics. The advice to government is in the minutes which is the decision of the Chairman, that is Patrick Vallance and Chris Whitty working as co-chairs. Civil Servants also attend the meetings and take their own views back to cabinet Office and Number 10 etc.

The border between the UK and France is supposed to be half way, if a boat is in UK waters the nearest port will be deemed to the English. For the the nearest port to be French you would have to intercept in French waters which would be with permission from the French. 

Your grip on reality is waning, "any country aiding and abetting" to that would be France, Italy, Greece, Turkey, Syria .... and so on.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Observer II said:

All that's required is for UKBF boats to intercept such migrants at sea and drag them back to France.

"WHAT INVADE FRANCE"......I'll get me coat......🤣

Link to post
Share on other sites

Err no Sid;  let's assume illegals are intercepted at the sea boundary, which applies in the straight of Dover;  UKBF boats would prevent any further travel in the direction of the UK.   The migrants would have to paddle back to France, unless they wanted to force a rescue by scuttling their boat. In which case, UKBF boats could effect a rescue, which would occur in French waters (perfectly legal), they then would transport the migrants to the nearest Port, which (because we're in the French zone), would be a French Port.  :unsure:     Just listened to Nigel Farage on Youtube;  and as he says, part of the problem is the Euro HR Act, which Blair incorporated into British Law;  with a Parliamentary majority, Patel could terminate this and replace it with home grown legislation that would serve a purpose in removing any legal rights from illegal entrants.  The Australians did this some time ago, allowing immigrant vessels to be towed back to Indonesia; and the problem of boat people has now gone.   😠

Link to post
Share on other sites

So you would expect the Border Force to patrol a sea border of 100 miles or more and intercept any boat which may, or may not, be carrying illegal immigrants? I don't think you quite grasp the size of the problem Obs.

Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, asperity said:

So you would expect the Border Force to patrol a sea border of 100 miles or more and intercept any boat which may, or may not, be carrying illegal immigrants? I don't think you quite grasp the size of the problem Obs.

Even better he wants to intercept them exactly as they are crossing the border and replenish the patrol while the interceptor takes the passengers back after due process of checking for real asylum seekers (during which UK waters are not actually entered although UK law applies.) 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Observer II said:

The illegals are taking the shortest distance = narrower front.:rolleyes:

Have you never heard of tidal streams? They are quite substantial through the Dover strait.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Let me state the obvious - on this subject, you’re an idiot Obs!   I don’t care what you think, that is personal and it’s directed right at you,.  Up til now you have been a joke on this forum, but enough is enough !   You have absolutely no credentials other than a big mouth, which usually issues a stream of idiotic gibberish and your views are either extremely naive, or designed to be controversial.  From a world where this nightmare is over, forget it, if you  can can not recognize that  ‘ infections’, means that someone had caught a cold, then there’s no hope for you.

I guess you will desperately hang on to your indefensible position, cos you’ve made too much of an fool of yourself over the last year to concede now.  
I don’t like to be controversial !  But  I had to help you out Asp, you are too nice.  

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

😄   We were talking about illegal migration, which you should know all about, after all, you were going to build a wall !  :rolleyes:     As for your personal comment, sticks and stones etc;  but as your a joke to me, the contempt is mutual.  :rolleyes:   Getting back to the topic - a YouGov poll now shows a 60% public majority for radical curbs on illegal immigration into the UK - so my views seem more in tune with a majority.  :unsure:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Up until now this forum has been free from personal attack and abuse despite expressing views that we don’t always agree on.

In all the years I’ve been a member of this group, I’ve only ever clicked the report button for offensive content once before but this sort of behaviour has no place here.

If Stalard is allowed to continue, he should know I’ve also clicked ignore so will never see anything more from him.

 

Bill

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Obs, your views and your life appear to be ruled by what other peoples' views are as reported in one poll or another. Why not try thinking for yourself? What was the question asked in this latest poll? "Do you think the government should be taking a more radical stance on immigration" perhaps? It isn't difficult for a pollster to get the result he wants.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Whether the polls are correct or whether we’re all being brain washed, I can only speak from my own experience and of the people I’ve spoken to over recent weeks, pretty much 100% seem to accept it may be necessary to hold off a bit longer with the relaxation of the rules, but nobody has even mentioned illegal immigration as playing any part in this.

That said I’d be surprised if only 60% thought we should do more to stop illegal immigration but maybe 40% accept that the rules we’re forced to comply with are so set in stone that they can’t ever be changed.

 

Bill 😊

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well 100% of the people I've talked to about relaxation of the rules say that we shouldn't delay one second more in getting rid of all these random mandates and get the country back to normal. I dare say that my random sample is, like yours, too tiny to be of any use to anybody, other than reinforcing our own beliefs I suppose. 😉

Link to post
Share on other sites

Asp, I do exactly that. think for myself, which is probably why I may clash with some posters on here; but it is some comfort to discover that my thoughts coincide with a majority on most subjects.    What annoys me, is the huge gap between majority opinion and the inability of Gov to match it in terms of solutions.   YouGov polls are the most commonly used samples of public opinion, so I'll stick to that rather than your anecdotal examples.     :rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just because a majority has one opinion doesn't make that opinion right. Constantly comparing your opinions with opinion polls and taking comfort from being of the same opinion as the majority isn't "thinking for yourself" because you are being guided by the majority opinion either consciously or sub-consciously. And, as I said before, pollsters are adept at getting the "right" answer to their polls by careful choice of the questions asked. So really you find yourself in agreement with the pollster's opinion rather than some supposed majority.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Majority opinion is the basis of democracy,  now if your promoting dictatorship; it would depend on the opinion of the dictator.   You could argue of course, that democracy is the dictatorship of the majority;  except that, at the moment, it clearly isn't; as shown by the many examples of woke dictatorship, appearing in our Universities and other private and public institutions.   😠

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...