E.U: Leave or Stay? Your thoughts.

Dunno 'bout Touquet, but the past week has given me Tourette.

 

Any ideas why the french actually agreed to that?

 

each country has a responsibility to ensure its outgoing personal to a destination are legitimate personal, legal.

Example, if Britain allows an illegal refugee to leave Heathrow on a plane and land in Paris, then that person should be returned back to Heathrow, straight away same hour.

Where the border is should be secondary to basic 1st world checks regarding identification etc. If a person is found to not be traveling with correct "papers". then they get returned back to source.

You can send 10k illegal travellers to the UK a day, but they will return back to the country that sent them is my take on it.


Again the point remains why has France allowed a huge mass of random people to build up along the coast line, trying daily to break across to this country.

This should already have been resolved, in or out of the EU, this is unfair, and again black male to keep us in the EU.


How many people are in this jungle?

They should be rounded up and relocated for identification and return to source if they are not from war torn regions.

Some body needs to start taking action.

There needs to be a zero tolerance attitude towards illegal immigration across Europe which is not approved, who is approving all this and why ffs, it has cost us our EU membership.

If you try to break into the UK illegally it should be that you are risking your life to do so, that is shoot to kill orders are issued to those that fail to stop and break into this country with out due process, I would hope that is the current defacto approach.

The UK is not a free meal ticket to the world just like Europe should not have been a free meal ticket to non war ravaged legitimate refugees.


remember that train station which had countless thousands of "Syrian refuges, fleeing war torn regions".

They were held up by officials, then some one had the bright idea to offer completely free train tickets to those people that are Syrian.

no one came forward for a ticket, non of them were Syrian. the whole mass of people at this station rioted and went ape sht.


Completely zero tolerance approach to any border at dover allowing even 100 non legal guests a month.

If we don't know who you are, were you have come from, that your call for refugee status can be clarified, you are not welcome and forcing your self into this country should be close to a deadly effort.


This is not joke, we do not want hard core lunatics, war criminals, terrorist just floating into this country it is not acceptable and if the Tory's can not manage this then I am sure the uk population will take the streets,

If the Jungle moves to dover and huge masses of people start appearing all over the screens of TV's up and down the nation all bets are off as to what the UK government can expect from the average joe of the UK.


ZERO tolerance to random unknowns landing on our shores, its what the entire country against here.

 

+1

 

The reality is that no country (with very few exceptions like North Korea) gives a f*** who leaves, just who enters.
Everyone who leaves is just one less future pensioner who needs to be fed and healed at tax payers expense.

France wants them to reach the UK (or any country that isn't France really), because once they are in any country that isn't France France doesn't have to deal with them any more.

 

Again, rainbowbridge, I think you'll find it's more complicated than that.

First, there are 6000 illegals living in the Jungle. Some are families, a surprisingly number are unaccompanied children. They are a mish-mash of economic illegals and refugees, some from crap that we started in the Middle East.

They are in Calais because basically they can't swim the channel. And that tells you how difficult it is to keep them from crossing borders on the mainland --it's not as if they queue up at border controls at motorways; they just walk across a field or forest somewhere. You can't fence off each European country any more than Britain can patrol 11000 miles of coastline.

That's the problem with illegal immigration: it doesn't use the conventional points of entry into a country. It just sneaks in wherever it can.

Now there is no reason for France to stop illegals leaving the country. They only keep them in the Jungle as a courtesy to the UK. That's why they are building up there. But the moment their dinghy hits the North Sea they really cease to be their problem. The UK could of course try to intercept them and send them back (again: 11000 miles of coast line) but where to? They can't prove that they came over from France and not e.g. Belgium, Spain or Portugal. And how? North Sea Ferries is not going to do it, so the Royal Navy is going to get rather busy.

There is a reason why the UK put their border control on the French side of the channel, doncha think?

Now all that ******** about "someone's got to start taking action" and "zero tolerance" and "shoot to kill" is talking out of your ass. Because what it means in real life is expecting the coast guard, trained to save people's lives, to watch people drown impassively. It's expecting border control to shoot people dead: Men, women, children families. I don't think you will find many people prepared to do that for a living, and if you do, you should worry about them, not the illegals.

You should get off your xenophobe acid trip that all illegals are criminals or psychos or terrorists. We grow plenty of our own. Many are refugees fleeing the crap that Western foreign and economic policy has contributed to (us treating the world as a meal ticket, frankly), and they are prepared to die for just a faint hope of a life that you and I take for granted.

When the UK Brexits, expect the Calais Jungle to come over here. There is no reason why France should keep it; it is the UK's problem now. And if that makes the population take to the streets that just goes to show again how ****ing arrogant, overentitled and deluded it is. Decisions to leave have consequences. It's about time you ****ing owned them.

 

http://news.sky.com/story/1722017/osborne-summons-bankers-for-eu-vote-talks


The meeting at 11 Downing Street, lasting for just over an hour, was attended by HSBC chairman Douglas Flint and his counterparts from Royal Bank of Scotland and Barclays - Sir Howard Davies and John McFarlane - as well as leading figures from Santander UK, Virgin Money, Nationwide, Metro Bank and Lloyds Banking Group.

Apart from the Chancellor, the meeting was attended by Harriet Baldwin, the economic secretary to the Treasury and Charles Roxburgh, the department's newly-appointed second permanent secretary.

Perhaps significantly, the only chairman of the leading commercial banks not to attend was Lord Blackwell, of Lloyds, who was a prominent supporter – in a personal capacity – of the "Leave" campaign ahead of the referendum.


what's going on with all these strong opinionated leave people,

 

They're all ****ing off now it's time to roll up the sleeves and make Brexit work. Should tell you something.

Fun fact: by dint of Farage's wife being German, she and their children all have EU citizenship status. Whatever the British people lose out on, his family sure won't.

 

Problems with that logic :
1) hard to prove what country was the "source"
2) after leaving EU, UK would probably be out of Dublin III Regulation, so you can't send them back to the entry point in EU anymore - you are not in EU, remember
3) last, but most important - once they are inside UK, they can ask for asylum. Remember, you are not part of Dublin III by then anymore, so you can't send them back to whatever EU country they entered EU.

I guess he plans to leave UN too. And ignore an unimportant document called Charter of Human Rights. And Geneva Convention.

 

There is also the small detail that the UK is in part responsible for the power vacuum and the instability that enabled the growth of crazy groups like ISIS that are converting what was once a fairly progressive country (comparing it to its neighbours) into a pile of rubble and blood.
But the thing that really grinds my gears is when we refuse to call these people by "war refugees" and call them "migrants"... as if that would change what they really are, people running away from certain death.

 

And things are on the edge of getting much worse in the middle east:

IF they are found to be responsible for the very recent attack in Medina then IS may well have lit a powder keg that will make the last 2 - 3 years look like a nice sunday afternoon stroll.

 

With regards the refugees, I thought their fave used trick was not to say which country they originated from until they arrive at their wanted destination. Hence why they ditch their IDs with locale evidence.

Today is a new day. Lets hope they "roll up the sleeves and make Brexit work."

Chilcott released today. If it is the suspected/dreaded whitewash then I imagine that it will be the final straw in some peoples sanity for this month.

 

...while the Pound has dropped to a new low.

Nobody is rolling up their sleeves. The government is still squabbling over who gets to be captain of the Titanic without a map, while everybody else is waiting for a sign of the above and telling each other how great things will be when the messiah comes and tells them what to do. We just have to have faith!

The Vote Leave campaign claimed that Britain could stop free movement and keep access to the common market. The electorate said:" Yay, let's do this!". Except that stopping free movement and keeping the economy from crashing are mutually incompatible goals. There is no solution to this:



This is why the Pound is dropping and investment has stopped. The world sees the UK trying to pursue an economically impossible goal with no leader at the helm and not a single conceivable idea of how to do it. What the UK needs is a government that says: "Screw this: we are not going to bankrupt our economy over a non-binding referendum". But that would require Brexiteers to admit that you cannot both stop free movement and keep access to the common market, that you cannot get out of the EU smoothly and quickly and simply slap a new relationship in place within a few years with the unanimous agreement of 31 EEA member states. Until they get real the country will continue to spiral into the abyss.

I think people lost their sanity a long time ago.

 

Blaming the UK for ISIS is like blaming America for Bin Laden. Both have similar circumstances about them, but we can not be held accountable for there actions after that. If we were we would be the main ISIS target instead of other nations.

America and UK will deal with ISIS eventually that's a reality though. EU has no more space for refugees is the issue, Germany and France are holding together the Bloc financial wise.

Italy are on the verge of another banking Crysis.

 

There is so much wrong with your statement I don't know where to begin.

 

Indeed they're but it's caused in no small part by our vote to leave. In such an interconnected world it's difficult not to feel the effect of losing $2 trillion from the global economy, especially so when your economy is only starting to recover from the last economic shock that was estimated to have cost $2.8 trillion from 2007 to 2010.

We almost managed to make the global economy lose more in the space of a few days than it took a recession 3 years to do, do we get a cookie?

 

We do. It tastes of bitter almond.

 

I don't blame the UK specifically, but we had a big hand in the US-led attack on Iraq.

If we hadn't basically torn Iraq and its army to shreds and left a hollow, corruptible, puppet government in our wake then we wouldn't have created the conditions which allowed ISIS to grow. If we hadn't decided to keep bombing the **** out of Iraq (as well as all the other countries that the West and it's allies are bombing the **** out of) then they wouldn't have had cause to be so pissed off at us and want to take revenge.

Remember: the West bombed an MSF hospital in Afghanistan and either outright lied or distorted the truth about it's involvement (https://theintercept.com/2016/04/28/searching-for-ground-truth-in-the-kunduz-hospital-bombing/ - a long read, but worth it). Specifically that was the US, but that distinction is often irrelevant or ignored - we're all part of "the West" and we're all allies of the US, so what's the difference? EDIT: Yes, I know, that's talking about the Taliban and not ISIS, but it still adds to the misery and death that we heap upon the Middle East.

Are you surprised that people are pissed off at the West when we lie about bombing hospitals?

 

I watched the ITV program on Brexit. Money experts say to keep spending and do exactly what we'd do if none of this were going on, hope for the best but plan for the worst. I feel this is a bit of a contradiction.....

They also split up someone's shopping bag into UK produce and non UK produce, saying the non UK produce will go up. Problem with that is if any of those UK produced goods rely on non UK goods then the prices will still go up regardless.

 

All major currencies in the world have gone up about 10% on average against the Pound. Sweden's Central Bank has also had to tear up its plans to raise interest rates.

More crap coming our way...