Labour's Disreputable Leadership

It came from him

He is the sauce of the source. Or the source of the sauce. No bad spelling.

Huh?

"Except there is a fair amount of kids in Northen France who already have family in the UK"

http://www.refugee-action.org.uk/ab...s_should_be_reunited_with_relatives_in_the_uk

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=r...=utf-8&oe=utf-8&gws_rd=cr&ei=LpSnVvnJIsz2-AHC

And yet according to your source:

That's a total of three children in over 6,000 migrants - or 0.05% of those camping-out in Calais. Hardly a "fair amount", Keith!

In any event, they have won the right to come to the UK and be re-united with their family members, so I'm not clear what point you're trying to make. Is there one?

sorry i didnt realise you needed me to post all the links I googled for you

And you didn't notice that those were links to different treatments of the same two stories - Corbyn's demand that the UK takes-in 3,000 children from the Calais camp and the recent Court ruling in favour of 3 minors and one dependent adult?

Suddenly the man who thinks that 1979 comes before 1978 is a maths wizard. As well as a spelling champion, and a doyen of online etiquette. Well done sir.

There's three, and that'll be the tip of the iceberg. It's like buses.

You are fortunate Mark to have no shame considering your families history

A Labour peer who was saved from the Nazis and brought to London in 1939 as part of the Kindertransport programme is calling on ministers to admit thousands of unaccompanied refugee children into Britain, as pressure grows for the UK to do more to help desperate and vulnerable young people who have arrived in Europe without their parents.

Alf Dubs, a former MP, who arrived from Prague at the age of six, believes he will win strong cross-party support after tabling an amendment to the immigration bill that, if accepted, would allow an extra 3,000 children to be taken in “as soon as possible”. The bill enters its committee stage in the Lords this week.

Last year Dubs paid tribute to Sir Nicholas Winton, known as the “British Schindler”, who was instrumental in rescuing him and 668 other Jewish children in the months before the outbreak of the second world war by organising eight trains to take them from Czechoslovakia to London.


Dubs was reunited with his father, who had fled to London earlier, at London’s Liverpool Street station. His mother joined them later, but other family members died in Auschwitz. Dubs says Winton almost certainly saved his life.

Yvette Cooper is saying the same

http://www.theguardian.com/global-d...may-to-admit-3000-lone-refugee-children-to-uk

Are you saying that members of my family were wartime refugees? And because of that alleged history, I should not be critical or in any way question the admission of these migrant minors into Britain?

Like everyone else on the political left, you're demanding that the government provides instant solutions to complex problems without any thought on your part of the practicalities involved. You think it if we admit the 3,000 children, auto-magically someone somewhere will look after them with money harvested from some Money Tree and, importantly, you (on the left) will have salved your collective consciences. I asked you how you expected our already over-stretched, under-funded social services to cope with this influx but you've been silent on that point.

The politically-correct multi-cultural Britain of the 21st Century is a rather different place to what it was in the late 1930s. For example, prospective fosterers must now pass full criminal records and background checks before they are allowed to become carers; no such checks in the 1930s. Those DBS checks used to be carried-out by the Criminal Records Office but it was semi-privatised by Labour and a £44 fee per person is payable; who will pay for them? There are almost no childrens' homes now (thankfully) and great care would need to be taken to ensure that a child is placed with carers who share a common cultural and religious background. But there may be too few acceptable hosts, what happens to the children who miss out - are you going to send them back to Calais?

And what happens if and when the families of those children now in foster care subsequently turn-up at Calais or Dunkirk and demand to be reunited with their offspring? The children could be being used as Trojan Horses - I am not saying that they are, but there's always that possibility, isn't there? No doubt the senior partners of Leigh Day and Public Interest Lawyers will be salivating and rubbing their hands with glee at the very thought of big fee earnings out of this.

But I think that the biggest disincentive to admitting any of these children has to be what is going on in Sweden where a child has just murdered a young woman whose job it was to care for him. The Swedish police are running scared of feral migrant minors who think nothing of attacking them and young women are frequently sexually-assaulted by gangs of young migrants who steal also from them. Not just in Sweden but in Denmark, Austria and Germany too.

Britain is already accepting asylum-seekers from the camps along the Syrian border but this humanitarian act may have a sting in its tail. These rescued refugees are being relocated to Bute in Scotland and to the Shetlands. Areas such as those are chosen because there is a good deal of empty housing available as the former residents have all moved-away looking for jobs elsewhere in Scotland and beyond. They are areas of near zero employment, so what will these refugees do to earn a living?

The EU has conceded that 60% of the migrants who arrived in Europe over the last month are not asylum-seekers but economic migrants.

Practical solutions are needed rather than meaningless grandiose gestures.

From reports I've read, it appears that the young Somali who murdered his Swedish carer, Alexandra Mezher, may not have been a child but a fully-grown adult in his twenties who had been posing as an orphaned 15 year old minor. Her parents have revealed that Alexandra told them months ago that she was caring for "powerful big guys" aged up to 24 who were living at the accommodation centre for young unaccompanied child-asylum-seekers. Credence to this is provided by a Swedish Police spokesman who said that Somalis don't have Birth Certificates and are simply told their date of birth - which, of course, may be completely different to their real birth date. It's quite likely that this case has been followed by Downing Street and the Home Office and has added weight to their refusal to accept "Corbyn's Kids from Calais". I am quite sure those charged with overseeing any entry by (alleged) orphaned child asylum-seekers would face exactly the same challenges to correctly identifying the applicants as confronted their Swedish counterparts and I don't expect the Brits to do any better.

A YouGov survey published by the Daily Telegraph would seem to indicate that most Britons are against accepting migrants from Calais:

​

I think we can suppose that this negativity stems partly from a real fear that Islamic State terrorists are hiding in the Calais camps and partly a reaction to the widespread attacks on women and young girls by asylum-seeker applicants rather than on a rise in xenophobia.

Yesterday, being Wednesday, it was the day of the weekly duel between Cameron and Corbyn, a fixture that the latter must surely dread. Corbyn began by asking Cameron if the tax settlement with Google - an effective rate of just 3% - was fair. This allowed Cameron to point out that under the last Labour government, the tax rate enjoyed by Google and other multinationals was zero percent.

Then Corbyn failed to press Cameron by pointing out that Google had just agreed to pay the French and Italian tax collectors far, far more than to Lin Homer (the outgoing - and disgraced - head of HMRC). Instead he asked a question on behalf of "Jeff" who wanted to know how he could sign-up to pay just 3% tax like Google. Cameron told "Jeff" that under the Conservative government his tax rate had fallen, whereas it had risen under Labour, and then said: "If like me he’s genuinely angry about what happened to Google under Labour, I can I tell him a few people he could call. Maybe he should start by calling Tony Blair – at JP Morgan. He could call Gordon Brown – apparently you can get him at a Californian bond dealer called Pimco. He could call Alistair Darling – I thinks he’s at Morgan Stanley, although it’s hard to keep up. Those are the people to blame for Google not paying their taxes." He concluded his reply with:

​

Corbyn sticks so rigidly to his prepared script that he failed to notice that Cameron had handed him an open goal. Instead of admonishing the Prime Minister on his choice of language, Corbyn droned: “No answers on Google, no answers on Jeff…” and moved on to the next part of his script.

Criticism of Cameron's use of the word "bunch" rather than "group" ("Bunch of migrants") only comes from the usual suspects on the left; Speaker Bercow ruled that Cameron's language was not unparliamentary.

Blah Blah Blah nope this is what im saying

Wow!! If thats true,thats a whole LOT of people in that huge yellow section.

Your opening insinuation in post #308 is highly offensive and when I ask you to clarify what you said, you are rudely dismissive with your "Blah Blah Blah".

I await your apology.

By the way, just like your leader you seem to forget that Britain has no legal obligation whatsoever in respect of those migrants encamped on the French coast by virtue of the Dublin Agreement - unless, of course, any hold British Passports that provide Right of Abode (not all Passports do). All these migrants have passed-through at least one other EU nation on their way to the French coast and all EU member nations are considered "safe" for the purposes of the Dublin Agreement, so it is one of those countries that should be processing their asylum applications, not Britain. But there's a fair chance that they're not true asylum-seekers but economic migrants. Almost half of those who entered Sweden last year have had their applications denied and are awaiting deportation.

This is Youssaf Khaliif Nuur (partially covered by a blanket) who is charged with the murder of 22-year-old aid worker Alexandra Mezher at a Swedish refugee hostel for children in Gothenburg:

​

He claims to be 15 years old but apparently he shaves his beard and moustache daily and when he appeared in Court the other day, at six feet tall he "towered over" his translator. Do you think he is lying about his age?

European Human Rights legislation outlaws means to determine a person's age using wrist X-Rays or checking the development of Wisdom teeth as these are deemed to be "invasive" - and there are no other reliable non-invasive methods. So under EU law, if a young male tells you he is 14 or 15 years old but there is an absence of documentary evidence, his word must be accepted.

Yesterday, staff at another child migrant centre in Sweden had to barricade themselves inside a room when a gang of 19 'teenagers', armed with makeshift weapons, went on the rampage and started attacking them.

Do you agree with me that young men such as Nuur are cynically exploiting the goodwill of their host countries by deliberately lying about their age? But it is youngsters like him that Corbyn met in Calais and Dunkirk, that he insists Britain takes-in.

But guess what .... Britain has been accepting unaccompanied child migrants for months, if not years. Kent County Council is at the sharp end of this as it has to look after kids brought over from France by people smugglers. You've publicly offered to foster a migrant child

Why not contact the Child Services department at Kent County Council and repeat your offer to them: I am sure they'd be delighted to hear from you. The Council currently has nearly 1,000 such children in its care and is reportedly desperate for help with housing.

Here's a link to the Council's web pages relating to adoption and fostering: Clickey-clickey here or you can phone them on 0300 041 4141. So are you a man of your word or simply a blustering ideologist?

Im sorry Mark I hadnt realised you had a problem with short term memory how sad I was refering to your comment "Members of my mother's family perished in Nazi concentration camps" and thought therefor you should no better or if not have no shame

post 79

http://www.british-filipino.com/index.php?threads/special-prices-for-tourists.11015/page-4

There is little similarity between Syrian refugees, and those who escaped the Nazi Germany death camps.

I find it strange that people use such a false comparison in order to score political points and deliberately cause offence.

How low can you, on the far left, stoop? Do you really imagine that I would be cowed by your attempts of emotional blackmail? Your serpentine attempt to take the moral high ground is contemptuous. If anything, my family's history has made me stronger to resist such rabid fascism such as you espouse. I can assure you that not even for a split nanosecond would I be dissuaded from my view by such a morally-bankrupt tactic.

All you have succeeded in doing is to compound the offensiveness of your message.

If you really wanted to help by providing a refugee child with a home, love and care, then you would have contacted Kent County Council or one of the refugee agencies with an offer to foster; you've had over a year to do so. But you haven't and I put it to you that you won't, just as Yvette Balls-Cooper and Emma Thompson - who've made similar offers as yours - have no intention of actually hosting a refugee. Sound-bites designed to make us all feel guilty rather than leadership by example. Epic fail!

I would suggest that you are far more likely to support the aims of anarchist groups such as London2Calais, known by the French police to be grooming refugees and inciting them to riot and break-in to port premises and England-bound trucks, storm aboard ferries and force entry into the Channel Tunnel. Revolution by proxy - getting others to do your dirty work, how Lenineske. Oh and before you get all puffed-up with faux indignation and play the victim card, no I am not accusing you of any involvement.

So as you mull revolutionary thoughts over your copy of the Morning Star, you would do well to remember that your fellow tax-payers (oh ... I am assuming that you do pay tax) contribute more hard-earned cash to helping displaced persons than any other nation in Europe and possibly beyond. We are taking refugees from Syria and we do home unaccompanied refugee youngsters. But Britain prefers to finance refugee camps and provide food, shelter and medical care close to Syria because we realise that that country will need to be rebuilt by its own citizens once the fighting there stops. Having them on the doorstep makes this so much easier.

Birmingham Labour MP Jess Philips did herself and her party no favours by dismissing the attacks on women in Germany, Sweden and elsewhere as being no worse than what takes place in Broad Street on an average evening. I was rather surprised by this outburst of hers during BBC's Question Time: I thought she was one of the more sensible moderates of her party. Perhaps not. Unsurprisingly her own constituents are up in arms over her comments and she faces demands to apologise to the people of Birmingham and calls to stand down.

The Labour Party that you support has become the party of negative politics and protest.

As you know,I`m often up for a bit of a wind up on the odd occasion but that really was a low blow KeithAngel...Out of order IMO.

Thank you, Dave, for highlighting an inconvenient truth.

Oh dear

​

That Ipsos MORI poll for the Standard also revealed some other uncomfortable findings for Labour including the fact that the public opposes unilateral nuclear disarmament by 70% to 24%. That level of support matches the 72-19 margin found in spring 1983, when CND-backer Michael Foot led the party to a rout, and the 70-24 margin of 1987, the last time Labour fought an election with a disarmament pledge and was hammered again.