• Please read the Announcement concerning missing posts from 10/8/25-10/15/25.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Time for UK to toughen up on African immigration - we don't want them

Rightwingguy said:
Opposing mass-immigration is not xenophobic, otherwise why weren't you shouting this pre circa 2000, or to all the other countries of the world that have strict immigration policies
Click to expand...
I don't shout, generally.

Apart from that I haven't the foggiest what you're talking about there.
 
OrphanSlug said:
:popcorn2: ...
this should end well.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...



The UK was mighty happy to colonize a good bit of Africa but now it doesn't want any Africans to colonize the UK.

What happened to 'what's good for the goose is good for the gander'? Doesn't that saying apply anymore?

Mighty sad.

:roll:
 
shrubnose said:
The UK was mighty happy to colonize a good bit of Africa but now it doesn't want any Africans to colonize the UK.
Click to expand...
of course, because back in the day , the Africans were savages that needed colonising - it's not the same the other way around in the 21st century

What happened to 'what's good for the goose is good for the gander'? Doesn't that saying apply anymore?

Mighty sad.
Click to expand...
No it doesn't and it never did - what is it with you libs, you think we should just throw it all away to an anarchic horde just because they are poorer than us , WTF

and if you think it's sad then why not give up your comfortable life and go out and live in the bush, bet you'd be back within weeks
 
Rightwingguy said:
of course, because back in the day , the Africans were savages that needed colonising - it's not the same the other way around in the 21st century


No it doesn't and it never did - what is it with you libs, you think we should just throw it all away to an anarchic horde just because they are poorer than us , WTF

and if you think it's sad then
why not give up your comfortable life and go out and live in the bush, bet you'd be back within weeks
Click to expand...
Click to expand...



I didn't colonize Africa. The UK did that, now they have a little problem.
 
Rightwingguy said:
they are not trying to break down the fence between Spain and Gib, nor are they looking to get welfare or jobs, etc...how can you say it's the same?
Click to expand...

LOL seriously. First off these migrants are not looking for welfare, because they CANT GET IT!. They are looking for jobs however. And the Spain Gib border is a haven for smuggling thanks to the lax policing of the Gib authorities.

and as for UK 'should be ashamed' of not taking in more? that's hilarious, well , we should be ashamed of having taken in so many already
Click to expand...

You have not taken any in at all!
 
PeteEU said:
What the hell are you taking about? The UK has border installations in France. That has been a requirement for the Chunnel from the start. France should not have to pay for that! **** the UK, if they want to screen people entering the tunnel.. do it in the ****ing UK not in France! And if the UK wants the installations in France to deal with this, then they damn well have to pay for it.
Click to expand...

Do you have the wording of the contract? In any event the UK is installing more robust protection now.

But, you know, it is less a question of immigration, which the UK can handle and does, when persons get on trucks and cross that way by fining the driver 2.000 sterling and depending on circumstance seizing the lorry. What you fail to see is that the fugitives enter the Chunnel on foot and get killed. So letting them through is not quite in accord with EU Human Rights. They also congest traffic and hinder trade, which is quite against the whole EU idea. ;)

But I know you dislike the British, because they do not think that your Europhiles have done a very good job of structuring the EU. And you hate to be told you have made a mess out of a basically sound idea. But why you would shoot the messenger escapes me. Where I come from, one doesn't do that. ;)
 
joG said:
Do you have the wording of the contract? In any event the UK is installing more robust protection now.
Click to expand...

No they are not, they are paying for what should have been there in the first place.

But, you know, it is less a question of immigration, which the UK can handle and does, when persons get on trucks and cross that way by fining the driver 2.000 sterling and depending on circumstance seizing the lorry. What you fail to see is that the fugitives enter the Chunnel on foot and get killed. So letting them through is not quite in accord with EU Human Rights. They also congest traffic and hinder trade, which is quite against the whole EU idea. ;)
Click to expand...

What you fail to understand, is that the Chunnel opening..is British controlled. So it is British security that is ****. And it is only recently that people have been really trying to go through the chunnel it self.

But I know you dislike the British, because they do not think that your Europhiles have done a very good job of structuring the EU. And you hate to be told you have made a mess out of a basically sound idea. But why you would shoot the messenger escapes me. Where I come from, one doesn't do that. ;)
Click to expand...

I do not dislike the British. I dislike miss-information. And the fact that you dont even understand that the British were part of structuring the EU, just shows your ignorance and hatred to anything European.

Your attack the EU constantly but often without a shred of evidence or links to back up your hatred. You say that the EU is structured wrong.. fine say what is wrong and how to fix it.
 
PeteEU said:
(1) No they are not, they are paying for what should have been there in the first place.



(2) What you fail to understand, is that the Chunnel opening..is British controlled. So it is British security that is ****. And it is only recently that people have been really trying to go through the chunnel it self.



(3) I do not dislike the British. I dislike miss-information. And the fact that you dont even understand that the British were part of structuring the EU, just shows your ignorance and hatred to anything European.

(4) Your attack the EU constantly but often without a shred of evidence or links to back up your hatred. You say that the EU is structured wrong.. fine say what is wrong and how to fix it.
Click to expand...

(1) So you say. I know of no treaty that states that and you obviously do not either.
(2) The Chunnel is on French soil and the Brits to the extent of my knowledge are there to facilitate travel and commerce. But as I said, if you have a contract text that contradicts the norm, I would love to read it.
(3) I did a quick and dirty scan, but could find nothing to corroborate your position. You see, it would be quite unusual for more than administrative tasks to be allowed to be performed or for activities by foreign police without a specific mandate by the nation on whose soil the activity was to be performed. So the Brits would probably be responsible for the rent and maybe a French secretary, but otherwise?
But in any event, I have put in a call to the Chunnel operators. They will call back with the details. I do like to know things, when they have been contested without evidence.
(4) Again you overstate the truth. I think the EU was a very good endeavor. But, when governments begin to make a mess of things, blatantly lie and miss represent, the nature of what they are doing and ensnare the citizenry causing huge, foreseeable and intentional damage of Trillion Euro magnitude to those they represent, well yes, I think that requires mention. And BTW, I have from time to time written on possible and sometimes necessary remedies, as you well know.
 
Higgins86 said:
The romans coloized Africa and the ME first, should we send them to Italy instead?
Click to expand...



Actually I believe that the Greeks were there first, but they already have a huge problem with illegal immigrants.

:roll:
 
Last edited:
shrubnose said:
Actually I believe that the Greeks were there first, but they already have a huge problem with illegal immigrants.

:roll:
Click to expand...

See how silly it is when you blame events that happened hundreds of years ago.
 
Higgins86 said:
See how silly it is when you blame events that happened hundreds of years ago.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...



Tell that to the Arabs and Africans who surely know that Europeans colonized their countries. These people (Some of them, at least.) are looking for some payback. And some of them are going to get it.
 
shrubnose said:
Tell that to the Arabs and Africans who surely know that Europeans colonized their countries. These people (Some of them, at least.) are looking for some payback. And some of them are going to get it.
Click to expand...

Ok...and us Brits should care why?
 
Higgins86 said:
Ok...and us Brits should care why?
Click to expand...
Click to expand...



How many colonies did Great Britain have in Arabia and Africa? Some people from those places may be coming to pay you guys a long visit. Returning the favor, so to say.

If you don't want people to visit you, don't visit them.
 
Chagos said:
Because the Welsh might clamor on kicking you out. :mrgreen:

Anyway, what's a Brit? Does eating fish'n chips suffice to qualify?
Click to expand...

Depends on if you put vinegar on your chips or ketchup.
 
shrubnose said:
How many colonies did Great Britain have in Arabia and Africa? Some people from those places may be coming to pay you guys a long visit. Returning the favor, so to say.

If you don't want people to visit you, don't visit them.
Click to expand...

We didnt visit them we conquered them, if they want to bring an army then that's fine. Good luck.
 
shrubnose said:
Tell that to the Arabs and Africans who surely know that Europeans colonized their countries. These people (Some of them, at least.) are looking for some payback. And some of them are going to get it.
Click to expand...

Where do you live? Germany, France, Britain and Italy all had colonies in Africa in recent times.

"Payback" shouldn't provide the basis for immigration policy. Common sense should.
 
Gardener said:
Where do you live? Germany, France, Britain and Italy all had colonies in Africa in recent times.

"Payback" shouldn't provide the basis for immigration policy. Common sense should.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...



Tell that to the many thousands of Arabs and Africans who are on their way to Europe.

I'm not interested, not my problem.
 
shrubnose said:
Tell that to the many thousands of Arabs and Africans who are on their way to Europe.

I'm not interested, not my problem.
Click to expand...


How many of these Africans and Arabs lived under a Colonial power? Like, NONE?

As far as immigration not being your problem, you are certainly free to exhibit absolutely no sense of social responsibility if you like, but why you would feel such an intense sense of guilt over something that happened long in the past to the point you would justify the destruction of your very society is beyond me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom