Quizzes & Puzzles19 mins ago
Suella Braverman Speech
she is spot on, but who is going to listen and make changes, seems politicans and lawmakers care nothing for the publics view, but only altruism or they are just scared.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by fender62. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Every time a question on asylum arises on here I have said exactly what Ms Braverman has had the courage to say. The asylum system is being used by people to gain entry to European countries and to move between those countries simply because they don’t like it where they are.
When asked their reason for leaving their country of origin, many so-called asylum seekers say it is because there is nothing for them and “they want a better life.” That is not the function of asylum. It is designed to provided safe haven for those in danger. But the courts have, over time, expanded that to include just about anybody who is remotely uncomfortable or unhappy in their homeland. The result is movement on an industrial scale of huge numbers of people looking for a “better life”. This is completely unsustainable and apart from that is undesirable for both the losing and recipient countries.
Ms Braverman is absolutely correct to call for a reset of the definition of asylum. However, she will get nowhere internationally and I suggest she takes unilateral action to protect the UK from this ridiculous fiasco. She can start by declaring that absolutely nobody arriving from France will be considered for asylum. None of them is in danger; none needs safe haven as they already have it.
The trouble is, NJ, there are pearl-clutchers who get a bout of the vapours when such a thing is suggested.
A few months ago there was a Labour MP on the Julia Hartley-Brewer show who was insisting these coves were all fleeing from war-torn countries or were escaping persecution.
JHB made the reasonable point that France is not war-torn and neither were they likely to have been persecuted (or at least any more than they would be in any other safe country). The MPs reaction was simply to reapeat they were fleeing war-torn countries and she simply wouldn't accept the fact they had escaped a war-torn country as soon as they crossed the border from the country they were fleeing, and had most certainly escaped by the time they had reached Europe.
it is an inconvenient truth to people like this MP that the vast majority of the British people do not like this invasion. And it is an invasion.
She's right, though. Not to accept it is storing up something like civil war in the future...... and I don't think that that is too far away. She's going to attract a heck of a lot of flak.
Canary - compassion is in order for those who deserve it. We are being taken advantage of and it is destroying the very compassionate country that we used to be.
I liked this from Jon Sopel:
Multiculturalism has failed’ says Suella Braverman who is from Kenyan and Mauritian background and married to a Jew, serving as Home Secretary in a govt led by someone whose family came from India.
Wonder what multicultural success looks like.
She's a political chancer.
Is there any evidence there is a significant number of asylum seekers merely claiming "discrimination" As opposed to persecution?
Multiculturalism has failed’ says Suella Braverman who is from Kenyan and Mauritian background and married to a Jew, serving as Home Secretary in a govt led by someone whose family came from India.
Wonder what multicultural success looks like.
Citing a few success stories among well-educated affluent people is hardly a ringing endorsement for muliculturalism, Ikky. Travel around the UK and you will see large areas in the country which are very much monocultural. And that culture is not home grown. It is imported to the country by people who are only interested in replicating the culture and conditions that exist in the place they have "fled" from. They will not become Home Secretaries or Prime Ministers. Instead they will remain in their cultural oases, culturally isolated and encouraged to do so by the liberal elite that has no idea what it is like for the few people of differeing cultures who are unfortunate enough to live around them.
Compassionate Conservatism at work.
My compassion is reserved for the people already in this country whose taxes are being used to pay the £8m per day it is costing to house new arrivals in this country in agreeable hotels (not to mention the ongoing costs once they have been "relocated"). People who have difficulty getting timely medical treatment, affordable housing and securing school places for their children.
I was brought up in SE London, specifically Charlton (come on you Addicks) and for those that don't know the geography of SE London, Woolwich is a couple of miles away.
Woolwich used to be quite nice, but now it bears more of a semblance to a souk than a SE London area. If anybody truly believes multiculturalism works, I urge them to visit Woolwich. Especially at night.
They will quickly realise it's a fallacy.
a polarized society as mentioned, but to the pro migrant lobby its all a fallacy, they should be taken to a few of these no-go areas and have a walk around in the day and at night, iv seen a few of these places myself, and with all these new young dinghy arrivals it just adds to the same problem, more no-go areas, more demand on services, more benefits more more more...and some just do not want to see it, but rather let it all fester till it knocks on there door.
