Should UK accept thousands of refugees because 423,000 people signed a Petition?

originally posted by: tempestking
so we bring in thousands of refugees into the uk and give them a place to stay and food and water and some money hay and a job so all ok ......................... BUT what about all the homless that live in the uk now that have no food no home to live in and no money and no job ...DO they not come first i mean to be helped ???????????????????????

I get to see a side to Britain few do. There are many homeless or living in substandard housing, in poverty and without what many take for granted. Despite the media portrayal that they are all beer swilling, chain smoking degenerates it is simply not true. There's a very small minority who are paraded as the face of underclass benefits Britain. The rest are people just like you or me, perhaps one or two paycheques or benefit payment away from living on the streets. Victims of circumstances. Where is the outrage, hero banners and tears for these people? People are dying right here and right now under our very noses. I don't care if they're black, white, Christian, man, woman, child, Jewish or Muslim. They're there but unseen by many. Meanwhile the eye of the media is cast thousands of miles away, it's sad.

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs
a reply to: Boeing777

Only 3% of the UK is developed.

The rest is empty space.


I say this not just to highlight how much we can afford to help refugees...

But also our own here at home who are homeless while 97% of the country is unused shrubbery.

Developing even 5% more (still less than 10% overall) would fix the UK and be one of the greatest economic boosts we could use to our advantage.


That's still leave 92% untouched so the antiquated can still look at fields on the train and motorways.

97% of the country is not "unused shrubbery" and "empty space". 6% of the UK is already urbanised. The idea of "garden cities", homes with large backyards was that people could grow their own food in a time of emergency, as well as have trees and vegetation that help to trap dust and soot and moderate the climate.

Britain already has to import 50% of the food consumed by the population.

If you want to build millions of new homes, you need to also build schools, hospitals, police stations, fire stations, ambulance depots and roads. Those have to be connected to motorways which requires more road construction. All of that requires new electricity, water, sewage and communication links and power stations. All of that is going consume a lot more land.

And it's only worthwhile building homes where there are actually jobs. You have areas in the North of England where entire streets consist of boarded up homes. Simply because there are no local employers to retain people.

On the other end of the housing scale, you have London, where a bedsit rents for £1000/week simply because it's in
Central London. All due to the fact that there are more job opportunities in London that there are elsewhere in the
UK.

I say Hell No


like the U.S. we need to take care of our Own First
and we can barely do that.

America needs to close Statue of Liberty's Book

“Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free.”

Breathe Free ?
American is suffocating with the Mass population in America Now
and make matters worse with immigrants legal and illegal
and we don't have descent jobs to support themselves in this nation !
most of the manufacturing jobs are all over sea's China mostly
thanks Merica .

Close the Book close the Quote take care of our own first


it would wipe out the UK. if that would ever to happen.
but then again the UK has common wealth nations under its wings
INDIA and Australia, Canada the majors of the common wealth

Oceania here we come!

I don't think its an entirely bad thing. The first world was never going to unanimously stand up and demand an end to war until the humanitarian cost turned up on its doorstep instead of being a thousand miles away on a tv screen. I think there should be a movement to petition corporations such as BAE systems and BP to set aside large amounts of capital to house these people as they've directly profited from their misery and lobbied for it.

The actual amount of refugees Cameron has pledged to take over the next 5 years equates to 12 per day, it's not the hordes the media is making it out be. Compared to the amount the Germans have taken on its nothing.

originally posted by: anxiouswens
So does that mean you will be putting your name forward to house one of these refugees? Or, like Cameron, are you all for it as long as it doesnt impact on your life. Cameron's constituency has none. Also it doesnt impact on a lot of the othet MPs.

I would love to, but I do not own my own home, and even if I did, we could take maybe one person, or a three member family. They could have my room at a treat, because I can and have lived a real life, and know how to go into camping mode for years at a time. As it happens, however, what is really needed is for government to stop whining about the cost, and of course all the xenophobic crap slingers as well. Anyone who is not aware that the taxpayer is robbed to the tune of thousands of times what it would cost to house these people in a year, really shouldn't consider themselves fit to have an opinion on this matter, since they have no conception of the level to which they are being played by the government on these issues.

Do you honestly believe all the thousands heading to Europe now are refugees. All the fit, young men who are creating problems in Macedonia, Hungary etc do you think they are refugeex. The people on the train in Hungary the other day do you think they were refugees. Apparently, according to BBC just a small number were from Syria they reckoned about 9%. The rest were from Pakistan, Iraq, Afganistan and so on. Thats if they are telling the truth.

Innocent until proven guilty. It does not only apply to law on this island, but to ethical choices we make as a nation, about how we are going to act in a given scenario. Of course, there is little enough ethical thinking going on in some quarters of this thread, but that is to be expected. People rarely resist the opportunity to allow right wing ideology to override common decency and respect for human life.

Do you havd the same concern TRUEBRIT for the disabled, homeless, elderley, ex servicemen of your own country. Obviously you dont.

There is only one person, on this whole planet, who can tell you what concerns me,and what does not. That would be me. You have no business, nor, from your responses, the computational capacity to either make those choices for me, or indeed discern even the barest hint of what concerns me.

Let's break this down. We could be PERFECTLY able to pay for refugees to enter, benefits claimants to claim, disabled, veterans and a whole host of other people who have needs which have a monetary cost, to have what they need, if the government stopped refusing to deal with the tens of billions of pounds of contract related fraud, carried out by those who supply government with both premises to operate from, and equipment and consumables to operate with. Any objection to refugee influx, given that FACT, must therefore be either the result of pure ignorance of the perfidy of our government, or just evidence of a hateful and xenophobic mindset.

Furthermore, both my grandfathers fought for their country, and they did not do so in order that those who came after them, could be selfish, greedy, avaricious, and HATEFUL when it came to the crunch. It is precisely because I respect those who have fought for this nation, that I must insist that its soul, and their memory be honoured by compassion and mercy, not tarnished by psychopathic indifference to suffering.

People with cancer are dying because they cant get hold of vital drugs because of the cost. Yet the money can be found for translators who charge up £600 an hour. Dont you think that is morally wrong.

And what about such people as Alan Hemming's wife do you think she will be welcoming of these people which ISIS have admitted they have managed to infiltrate. What about the relatives of the Tunisian massacre?to a reply to: TrueBrit

So... Hang on... Are you telling me, that because people have been murdered by a tiny percentage of people with a certain belief system, that ALL refugees should be prevented from entering the country? Are you telling me that the actions of the one, dictate the fate of the many? AND YOU DARE TO INVOKE VETERANS IN YOUR ARGUMENT?

Let me tell you a little something about veterans of total war. There are not many left now, and those who remain are all very old men, gentlemen who stared into the guts of hell, and made what peered back at them wet itself in fear. They went to war to defend their homeland against ACTUAL invasion, not some pathetic and ineffectual gonzo bomber outfit, trained by our own nations intelligence services for the most part, and supplied with money from nations we are still allied to. Oh no... No it was a military, against a military, and the scale and power of the military machine that the veterans of total war faced, was nothing short of gargantuan.

And do you know, it was a bunch of mercy averse, compassion allergic bastards who ran the Nazi machine that my grandfathers, veterans of the Second World War, helped to dismantle. No matter what faces this country, no matter from what quarter, there will never be a place here for those who lack mercy. There will never be a place here for those who lack compassion, nor decency, nor an inherent understanding that with the great boon of living in a rich and peaceful nation, comes a responsibility to help those unfortunate enough to have been born to either a poor or war torn one.

You can make any argument you like, you can trot out the UKIP, or for that matter the BNP or Britain First manifesto top ten political levers if you really want. It makes no difference. The reality is, that if you love your country, then you should be able to understand that strapping on some jackboots and a shiny eagle, is not respectful of those who ACTUALLY saved this nation. Let's be realistic shall we? For all that I have a massive amount of respect for the servicemen and women who fought the last two wars this nation had a hand in, the fact is that:

A) the threat to our nation, posed by the (I cannot help but laugh at using this terminology) military might of the terrorists in Afghanistan, and the military of Iraq was never even a tiny slice of the threat we faced from the Nazis.

And B)As such, no action taken, no matter how courageous, by our forces in those theatres, save for PURE intelligence gathering missions, has ever saved a British citizen, on British soil. Many of those actions, again, with the greatest respect for our military personnel, actually made an attack on our soil MORE likely, not less.

In summary, your arguments are null and void. You have no understanding of what is going on in the world, or indeed what motivated people to make sure that by this point in history, there would BE a Britain to defend, and this is why you spit in the face of their efforts in times past, with your ill informed words. It is YOU who has failed to see the wood for the trees here, make no mistake about that.

a reply to: TrueBrit

My ancestors fought in both World wars too and it wasn't to sell our birth rite down the river because some lefties think it is the right thing to do. Also because of the legal and legitimate war in Afghanistan we are less likely to be attacked this is a fact. Why should my tax money be used to rectify the wrongs from the Arab Spring? Was it the UK that caused it?

originally posted by: crazyewok
As long as they are vetted to make sure they are REAL refugess and have no known criminal background then yeah.

Lets be fair the UK bares some responsibility for the mess in the ME.

Shame the US dont live up to there ideas of responsibility and take a few from the mess they helped cause.

End of the day though they need to be refugess not economic migrants, background checked and from a area we helped screw up!

O and all the property Blair and any politicians that voted for ME action should be seized and used to house such refugess.....

I dunno man, the "blame the US for everything" is kinda worn out on this one. Its not like these guys in the ME havent been fighting their 1000 yearold tribal conflicts with eachother, not to mention religious sectarian violence that have caused much war within Islam. Its in their blood (so to speak)!

So... is the US to blame for that too?

a reply to: combatmaster

The US has as much responsibility for this as the UK does. Not much in my eyes but if we are being forced to take them then so should the US.

originally posted by: biggilo
a reply to: TrueBrit

My ancestors fought in both World wars too

And we should all thank them for that.

and it wasn't to sell our birth rite down the river because some lefties think it is the right thing to do.

First of all... It was not a bunch of Conservative party old boys who went to war back in the day. It was a bunch of factory workers, grafters, and union members largely speaking. They are precisely the lefties you seem to have a problem with, since it is their wisdom from which modern thinking on these subjects comes. I learned from my grandfathers by rote, what they learned by hard experience and by witnessing the horrors of the darkest period in all human existence.

Also because of the legal and legitimate war in Afghanistan we are less likely to be attacked this is a fact.

Simply put, that is utter and total twaddle. Every drone deployment, bomb dropped from an aircraft, every artillery deployment that caused collateral deaths, added to the percentage chance that some fool would try and perform a suicide attack here. You would have to have been lobotomised with a half brick in order to fail to see that.

Why should my tax money be used to rectify the wrongs from the Arab Spring? Was it the UK that caused it?

It was the western allied nations and their constant and unceasing back channel meddling that allowed for any of this! Ironically, IS and the like could never have existed without the able assistance of the Western intelligence services. They are the ones who taught the first IS to fight, to kill, to destroy, back before IS ever existed. IS are nothing more than the result of at least two failed western foreign policy ideas.

First is the idea that training local elements and giving them weapons, despite the fact that it worked out REALLY badly with that Osama chap, is a good idea. It is not, its a bloody stupid idea, because the only result in the last CHRIST ALONE KNOWS how many attempts, has been yet another terror group showing up, and the cycle beginning again. This means everyone supporting the plan as it stands is a total clod, and that it needs to stop immediately, because all that happens is IS, or something similar.

The other foreign policy idea that failed leading to this conclusion is the idea that any kind of guerrilla force like IS, or like Al Qaeda can be countered effectively and completely with a traditional military force, massed armour, massed air bombardment, or any of that bloody nonsense. They cannot. They can however be countered with assassins, targeted, precise, and collateral free assassination. THAT can work. Nothing else. Just because it is difficult, does not mean it is not the correct way to go about things. Hit them with air strikes, and you make martyrs by the hundred, and recruits by the thousand. Hit them with a single round to the skull from a mile and a quarter out, and no one is going to miss the sorry sons of dogs.

But Oooh no, we had better destroy this whole apartment block, just because of the five terrorists on the roof!

BUNKUM!

If we are going to behave like that on the world stage, then we can damned well take on board some refugees from situations we either had a direct hand in, or situations caused by our failures to control intelligence assets gone rogue.

No, thanks. We're overrun with foreigners as it is now.
a reply to: Boeing777

a reply to: MagnaCarta2015 but unfortunately I will become our problem the amount Germany, France etc are taking because once they are granted asylum and given a passport they can then freely travel to UK and there is nothing we can do about it. Watch this space. How are we going to manage if even half of these arrive on our doorstep on top of the 20,000 and other EU residents and the illegals it could easily reach over 1 million in 12 months!

a reply to: anxiouswens

The naturalisation process takes years even in the most lenient parts of the EU; in that time most of them will have created some semblance of a life in their host countries.

a reply to: anxiouswens

There are other refugees dotted around the world so should we be taking 20,000 from each of those so how & where do we draw the line.

It's also very cynical that politicians from ALL parties saying they would offer a place in their homes if needed, I PMSL at that since they have NEVER taken in a BRITISH homeless person off the streets and that problem has been around a lot longer.

a reply to: CharlieSpeirs

You do realise I hope that all that greenery your having a pop at helps FEED us and helps good old Mother Earth breath.

We have plenty of homeless of our own, cancer treatment drugs are being dropped but we can find £100 M for refugee camps ?

We all ready give more in foreign aid than the major players in Europe so we do our bit, the quucker we get out of Europe the better !

Well, last weekend we had 20.000 refugees arriving in Munich alone. We care for them as human beings, not as scum or whatever some in this forum seem to see them. We care for them. And we will continue to do so. Vice-chancellor Gabriel gave out a statement about Germany able to cope with 500.000 new refugees per year for some more years.

Is the UK unable to provide shelter so some hundred thousand refugees per year? Why?

What about a fair amount of refugees to every country in the EU, correlated to number of citizens and economical powers?

We can do it, does the UK so much more worse in economical ways than us?
Or are they just pussies, being afraid of the future challenges? Well, close the borders, then. Stepping out of Europe, you are already on the way. Go ahead. Be a poodle to the US or whatever you want to be. It will not be a proud moment to you, losing face to the world.

An empire long lost ago, the UK.

Sure, take the immigrants, as long as those who sign the petition are the ones who'll house, school and feed them.

That won't happen though.

They are writing cheques with other people's money, it won't be their kids who suffer sub standard schooling, it won't be their families that can't see their GP or get a hospital appointment and it won't be them who see their wages depressed and working conditions erode.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing, but how many people now wish we had left Gadaffi alone?

a reply to: TrueBrit

Bunkum. You confuse income and jobs with politics, being left or right wing has nothing to do with income, lots of factory workers etc are right wing. Also, Union members? Have you studied history? the unions behaved appallingly during WW2. I am not here to educate you people, you are the second person who has addressed me on this thread without adequate knowledge or the proper facts. But you say I am the one 'lobotomised with a half brick' whatever that is supposed to mean (you know what a lobotomy is?)

The main issue with this is how many refugees will be extremists that are acting as "refugees" . then have a civil war type of scenario once bedded in.

Remember these are humans in need and not an infestation. We should help humanity where we can.

FEMA camps in USA are un-occupied, maybe try there first.

a reply to: ManFromEurope Don't make me laugh you care for them? A lot don't care for them it all over the internet how the far right are growing substantially in Germany. Haven't there been a few refugee buildings set on fire? Obviously, you are a German resident and will know more than myself however, there is a lot of stuff out there on the internet showing that not everything is quite as green and cosy as you would have us believe. There are a lot of German people who DON'T agree but like here the msm choose not to show this.

By the way we are taking refugees but for once David Cameron is doing exactly the right thing. He is taking them from refugee camps in Turkey and Lebanonon and surrounding areas. Why, because there are lots of vulnerable orphans, elderly, sick in these camps who have done the right thing and gone through the correct channels to seek asylum and they should be rewarded for that. Merkel is telling everyone they are welcome in Germany. What sort of message is that sending out. If you make the journey across the sea, you can queue jump and be rewarded. It is up to Germany how many refugees they would like to help, it is not up to Germany to demand and tell other European members what quotas they should be taking. We are not living under the dictatorship of Germany or perhaps you haven't realised this. Also, the UK didn't sign up for the open borders policy as we had forethought so why should we have to now suffer for the mistakes made by other European countries who did sign up to that?

A couple of final points:

1 How does the UK leaving the EU make us a poodle to America. President Obama has advised us NOT to leave the EU.

2 We are a island so can't be compared to Germany as you have a far greater area of land.

a reply to: anxiouswens

Well according to this News Article, there are planned attacks coming our way... whether or not they will be stopped is another question. We have let the enemy in through the front gates:

"TERROR ALERT: UK faces attacks within WEEKS, government warns as is prepares drone strikes"

"TERRORISTS are planning to strike in Britain within WEEKS, the Defence Secretary has warned, as he said the Government "would not hesitate" to launch further drone strikes against British jihadis in Syria."

On klling those 2 Jihadi fighters (British born) who went off to fight the War, the defense Secretary has said:

“There are other terrorists involved in other plots that may come to fruition over the next few weeks and months and we wouldn’t hesitate to take similar action again. "There is a group of people who have lists of targets in our country, who are planning armed attacks on our streets, who are planning to disrupt major public events in this country and our job to keep us safe, with the security agencies, is to find out who they are, to track them down and, if there is no other way of preventing these attacks, then yes we will authorise strikes like we did.”

www.express.co.uk...

So, what do you think we should do? Are we sitting ducks? Is all this Propaganda? What is the truth? And furthermore, what is our Governments aim?

What happens if an attack happens? (which is very possible due to the amount we most likely have here now). Do we then kick them all back out? (even if they do present themselves as 'Peaceful').

Already there have been more attacks on 'Muslims' this last year:

"BBC's Inside Out London Special tonight reports a 60 per cent rise in the number of attacks on women wearing headscarfs. Figures also show a 70 per cent increase in Islamophobic attacks in the capital in the 12 months up until July this year."

And then I read this in the comments section:

"Jewish boy who was attacked by thugs of Asian description in Manchester on Saturday night. A teenage boy was battered unconscious and three young men were also assaulted during an anti-Semitic attack at a tram stop.at a Metrolink station in north Manchester. . The 17-year-old, who lost consciousness during the attack and remains in hospital suffering from a suspected bleed to the brain."

Also I remember reading another story last week where a cyclist was chased and attacked by people shouting racist abuse!

All this doesn't bode well for the future!