How do you stop the migrants crossing the channel

[Staffsknot]

10 hours ago, Confusion of VIs said:

Like you have been drinking

Amazing the contrived lengths some have gone to for deflecting an argument isn't it. Almost like they don't want to help but can't bring themselves to say I don't want to help...

Edited August 25, 2021 by Staffsknot

[IMHAL]

11 hours ago, coypondboy said:

A bit too far to get to Bournemouth but you never know 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9921581/Migrants-celebrate-land-Broadstairs-beach-Kent-stunned-sunbathers.html

Bournemouth happy to accommodate them over the winter as hotels will be quiet then. Our local bbc news reported an afghan family who arrived over 20 yrs ago from Watford using our new electric barbecues which cost 100k must be the most expensive in the world skip to 20 minutes to view.

www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m000z3y0/south-today-evening-news-24082021

 

 

And your point is?

Sorry, I get it now. Afghans are environmentally friendly. Thanks.

[Greater Fool]

15 hours ago, IMHAL said:

Well you tell me!

Leavers voted to leave the EU, thus they voted to end the Dublin 111 agreement that allowed the Uk to send back migrants. It's the Brexiteers problem.

You want to use 'force' to stop them? That would not only be considered a crime and be shamefull to this nation but it would be against international law. What do you guys want to make the UK? The new North Korea? 

Enforcing the border is nothing to do with Brexit, the buck stops with the UK government to protect the borders. If they aren't effectively doing that they are failing in their responsibilities.

[markyh]

15 hours ago, IMHAL said:

Well you tell me!

Leavers voted to leave the EU, thus they voted to end the Dublin 111 agreement that allowed the Uk to send back migrants. It's the Brexiteers problem.

You want to use 'force' to stop them? That would not only be considered a crime and be shamefull to this nation but it would be against international law. What do you guys want to make the UK? The new North Korea? 

Passive deterrent, but lethal. Build a wall in the centre of the English channel that stretches from Ramsgate to Eastbourne , either in the centre, of at the edge of British territorial waters, so that any ocean on the "french side" was not our responsibility.  It could have a few large gates for shipping to enter through at desired access areas. Other than that it would be designed to be be so tall and invertly angled that it would be impossible to scale by ladder, and to tall of any human to through a hook and rope high enough to catch.  But this would be the 2nd line of defence, the first being a artificial reef / boulder /jagged rock formation at the base of the wall on the French side that would make it suicidal to try and land and small boat or yacht there without it getting smashed to pieces. 

The only option would be to sail around it both ways making journeys 3-4 times as long and dangerous than they are now, and if that became a big issue, just start extending the wall. And only rescue patrols by the English from the English side. French rescue boats would be forced to take any survivors back to French beaches.

[IMHAL]

1 hour ago, Tiger131 said:

Enforcing the border is nothing to do with Brexit, the buck stops with the UK government to protect the borders. If they aren't effectively doing that they are failing in their responsibilities.

How do they 'protect the borders' against asylum seekers?

[IMHAL]

55 minutes ago, markyh said:

Passive deterrent, but lethal. Build a wall in the centre of the English channel that stretches from Ramsgate to Eastbourne , either in the centre, of at the edge of British territorial waters, so that any ocean on the "french side" was not our responsibility.  It could have a few large gates for shipping to enter through at desired access areas. Other than that it would be designed to be be so tall and invertly angled that it would be impossible to scale by ladder, and to tall of any human to through a hook and rope high enough to catch.  But this would be the 2nd line of defence, the first being a artificial reef / boulder /jagged rock formation at the base of the wall on the French side that would make it suicidal to try and land and small boat or yacht there without it getting smashed to pieces. 

The only option would be to sail around it both ways making journeys 3-4 times as long and dangerous than they are now, and if that became a big issue, just start extending the wall. And only rescue patrols by the English from the English side. French rescue boats would be forced to take any survivors back to French beaches.

🤣 At last, a leaver with a sense of humour!! 

[markyh]

Just now, IMHAL said:

🤣 At last, a leaver with a sense of humour!! 

Oh i'm serious, if it gets bad enough i will run for the new "BNP" style party, complete will all weather trumpish wig, campaign to build this wall and make the French and Middle East pay for it. 

[dugsbody]

1 hour ago, markyh said:

Passive deterrent, but lethal. Build a wall in the centre of the English channel that stretches from Ramsgate to Eastbourne

When are you planning this? I'd like to swim the  channel once in my lifetime so better to do so before your plan goes ahead.

[IMHAL]

19 minutes ago, markyh said:

Oh i'm serious, if it gets bad enough i will run for the new "BNP" style party, complete will all weather trumpish wig, campaign to build this wall and make the French and Middle East pay for it. 

Don't know about you being an MP , but you'd make a good stand-up comic. 😄

[markyh]

Just now, dugsbody said:

When are you planning this? I'd like to swim the  channel once in my lifetime so better to do so before your plan goes ahead.

As a British National you will be able to book a slot to have a gate left open for you 1 hr either side of a 4 hr window, you will just need to co-ordinate with Border force / Authorities as you would now regarding avoiding shipping etc. Once your team radio's your approach during within 1 mile of the gates during the 4 hr window the gates with remain open for 2 hrs to let you through. Something like that. 

[IMHAL]

24 minutes ago, markyh said:

Oh i'm serious, if it gets bad enough i will run for the new "BNP" style party, complete will all weather trumpish wig, campaign to build this wall and make the French and Middle East pay for it. 

Another thought as I like your thinking. You could just drain the channel and put barbed wire across it. I can't see any problem with this at all. We could make salt flavoured ice pops out of the drained water and sell those to people with iodine deficiency...that should more than pay for the venture. Job done.  Life is just so easy when you think like a Brexiteer

 

[Greater Fool]

2 hours ago, IMHAL said:

How do they 'protect the borders' against asylum seekers?

It's not difficult to physically stop illegal channel crossings if we wanted to, we are an Island and we have a navy.

Edited August 25, 2021 by Tiger131

[IMHAL]

26 minutes ago, Tiger131 said:

It's not difficult to physically stop illegal channel crossings if we wanted to, we are an Island and we have a navy.

How do you know they are illegal?

[Insane]

2 hours ago, IMHAL said:

Another thought as I like your thinking. You could just drain the channel and put barbed wire across it. I can't see any problem with this at all. We could make salt flavoured ice pops out of the drained water and sell those to people with iodine deficiency...that should more than pay for the venture. Job done.  Life is just so easy when you think like a Brexiteer

Or we could just let everyone in who wants to come. No Questions , No knowledge of who they are , No figure of when we are full up. Just say UK open all Welcome. 

Then if anyone already here wants to moan we can call them Brexshiters, Bigotts, Racists Little Englanders and make sure we ram the point home to them that we need all these immigrants good or bad as the Brits are just so lazy. 

[debtlessmanc]

Telegraph, France sees us as the solution

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/08/25/take-share-asylum-seekers-french-europe-minister-tells-uk/

"We must, after Brexit, have a new migratory deal no doubt between the EU and Britain so that we can expel, or direct a certain number of migrants to the UK so they can request asylum," Mr Beaune told CNews."

France has real problems, i kind of agree with Mr Beaune, just about the only solution they have is the UK and the channel.

Edited August 25, 2021 by debtlessmanc

[IMHAL]

2 hours ago, Insane said:

Or we could just let everyone in who wants to come. No Questions , No knowledge of who they are , No figure of when we are full up. Just say UK open all Welcome. 

Then if anyone already here wants to moan we can call them Brexshiters, Bigotts, Racists Little Englanders and make sure we ram the point home to them that we need all these immigrants good or bad as the Brits are just so lazy. 

Or..the migrants can be processed and their cases heard on a case by case basis...much as it has been all along... you guys are so totally ignorant...there must be a better term.... as that term does seem sufficent.

[Save me from the madness!]

46 minutes ago, IMHAL said:

Or..the migrants can be processed and their cases heard on a case by case basis...much as it has been all along... you guys are so totally ignorant...there must be a better term.... as that term does seem sufficent.

I think it would be fair to say though that there are issues with the current process where it takes years to process and verify an asylum claim, and any rejected get to have a protracted legal appeal, and then at the end of it can either disappear into the black market or simply refuse to leave and see how long it takes UK gov to forcefully evict them. The whole thing must cost a fortune and seems to make everyone unhappy! 

[Save me from the madness!]

I'll be bold and suggest we should only take asylum seekers from the camps in neighbouring countries (to where the need for asylum is arising from e.g. Turkey and Lebanon for Syria etc), at least then there is a high chance of them being genuine and in need. Currently I wonder if the migrants we take in are the ones who need help the least given that they are healthy and wealthy enough to have trekked across 1/4 of the globe. It's the ones to ill and poor to afford the journey I'm worried about. Currently we seem to have some sort of sick hunger games like contest of those migrants healthy and wealthy enough to make it to our shores can claim. 

Edited August 25, 2021 by Save me from the madness!
Additional clarity

[Insane]

45 minutes ago, IMHAL said:

Or..the migrants can be processed and their cases heard on a case by case basis...much as it has been all along... you guys are so totally ignorant...there must be a better term.... as that term does seem sufficent.

Oh their processed are they , I  learn something every day especially when I read your words of wisdom. 

Maybe you can enlighten me :- They counted over 800 people arriving in dinghy's yesterday via the Channel. Anyone who has not taken that number on face value knows it is more. The figure of over 800 is the ones they counted. If you care to take your head out of the sand and do your own research there are many clips on the internet showing people arriving on the beaches alighting their dinghy's and running away.

They are not stopped they are not counted they show no paper work and no one knows who they are or where they are now. So please take the burden of my ignorance that is weighing heavily on my shoulders and explain the processing for these people's cases ? I would be most grateful for your expertise in this matter. 

Who was it said was ignorant ? 

[Insane]

4 hours ago, IMHAL said:

How do you know they are illegal?

Lol 

You get worse.

There has been a lot of exposure re the Dinghy/Channel route to the UK recently , many illegals cross this way even though it is Dangerous. A legal immigrant has many safer routes to travel into the UK. 

I would guess a legal immigrant choosing the dangerous route used by the illegals when they have other safer routes is something that does not happen. Maybe that is a clue to why the poster knows those crossing the Channel in Dinghy's are illegal.

However I am open to suggestion's , idea's and discussions as to why legal people might cross in this way.    

[Confusion of VIs]

9 hours ago, Tiger131 said:

Enforcing the border is nothing to do with Brexit, the buck stops with the UK government to protect the borders. If they aren't effectively doing that they are failing in their responsibilities.

 

10 minutes ago, Insane said:

Lol 

You get worse.

There has been a lot of exposure re the Dinghy/Channel route to the UK recently , many illegals cross this way even though it is Dangerous. A legal immigrant has many safer routes to travel into the UK. 

I would guess a legal immigrant choosing the dangerous route used by the illegals when they have other safer routes is something that does not happen. Maybe that is a clue to why the poster knows those crossing the Channel in Dinghy's are illegal.

However I am open to suggestion's , idea's and discussions as to why legal people might cross in this way.    

Because they don't have a "legal" route to have their claims properly considered outside of the UK. 

NB Surely by now you are aware it is not illegal to ignore border rules if your intention is to claim asylum. So presuming they are not coming here on holiday the dingy arrivals are not illegals.  

[Insane]

1 minute ago, Confusion of VIs said:

NB Surely by now you are aware it is not illegal to ignore border rules if your intention is to claim asylum. So presuming they are not coming here on holiday the dingy arrivals are not illegals.  

Please put up a link showing you can ignore border rules when claiming asylum. 

[Confusion of VIs]

40 minutes ago, Save me from the madness! said:

I'll be bold and suggest we should only take asylum seekers from the camps in neighbouring countries (to where the need for asylum is arising from e.g. Turkey and Lebanon for Syria etc), at least then there is a high chance of them being genuine and in need. Currently I wonder if the migrants we take in are the ones who need help the least given that they are healthy and wealthy enough to have trekked across 1/4 of the globe. It's the ones to ill and poor to afford the journey I'm worried about. Currently we seem to have some sort of sick hunger games like contest of those migrants healthy and wealthy enough to make it to our shores can claim. 

That's the way it has always been. +90% don't have the resources to make it here, or to Europe, and certainly won't be offered a "legal" route.  

[Confusion of VIs]

7 minutes ago, Insane said:

Please put up a link showing you can ignore border rules when claiming asylum. 

The right to asylum shall be guaranteed with due respect for the rules of the Geneva Convention of 28 July 1951 and the Protocol of 31 January 1967 relating to the status of refugees

Convention Relating to the Status of Refugee

You are not alone in not knowing the law.  Priti Patel kept on describing them as illegals and actually tried to prosecute some, the CPS threw out the cases and explained the Geneva Convention to her.   

 

[coypondboy]

14 hours ago, IMHAL said:

And your point is?

Sorry, I get it now. Afghans are environmentally friendly. Thanks.

Our council hoping to put them up in local hotels over the winter months good idea as keeps the hotels ticking over during this quieter period.  We have several local mosques and lots of english speaking language schools to help them with their english.

We had our first batch of brits going the wrong way a couple of days ago as there was an offshore wind and the pink flamingo they were in got blown out to sea.  The had come down from East Ham could not swim and were shouting eagerly at people on the end of bournemouth pier to be rescued.  Maybe we could do the same thing with the new arrivals from France by setting up large wind manchines to blow them back across the Channel to France.

Edited August 26, 2021 by coypondboy