Shrimpsvoices

Something to warm the heart and it should cheer solentshrimp up ?
A bit of good news at last. Heated tents for those desperate migrants at Calais,
Not sure what the Daily Mail' 'slant' on the story will be ?

Interior Minister Bernard Cazeneuve said the measures were to protect some of the 6,000 people at the camp from cold temperatures as winter approaches.

" heated tents will be set up... by the end of the week," he told reporters, vowing that "no woman, no child will remain without a shelter in this city".

Ahhh Some compassion at last.

Full story below.



http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-34600107

Got a nightclub on site as well

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... vists.html

slackAlice2 wrote:Something to warm the heart and it should cheer solentshrimp up ?

Humantatian Aid isn't it, so no problem.

slackAlice2 wrote:A bit of good news at last. Heated tents for those desperate migrants at Calais,
Not sure what the Daily Mail' 'slant' on the story will be ?

I think the story is in the DM now. Why not read it, and come back with your analysis?

slackAlice2 wrote:A bit of good news at last. Heated tents for those desperate migrants at Calais...

It doesn't look as though these 'desperate migrants' are being very grateful for the compassion being shown to them...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3286004/The-migrants-putting-lives-line-Britain-One-man-sits-tracks-halt-Channel-Tunnel-train-dozens-friends-swarm-board.html

It might help their case if the photos from Calais included a few women and children instead of fit young men, many of whom were already entrenched in Europe's Black Economy.

Lots of interesting comments at the bottom of the article.

SolentShrimp wrote:...dailymail.co.uk

...Lots of interesting comments at the bottom of the article.

Yeah, I'm sure there are. From lots of nice decent, humanitarian people I'm sure. But I'll just guess rather than sully my computer screen by actually looking.

I could tell you about a wagon driver I know, who actually witnessed journalists paying some young lads at calais to pose next to a carefully staged mess next to a camp, drinking the beer they had given them, and asking them to keep women and children out of shot in aid of ''artistic licence'',but I suppose
he could have made it up, to sully the reputation of our impeccable pressmen, for no reason at all.

mrpotatohead wrote:who actually witnessed journalists paying some young lads at calais to pose next to a carefully staged mess next to a camp, drinking the beer they had given them, and asking them to keep women and children out of shot in aid of ''artistic licence''

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sLZ1LT0kd-4

Whats the chances.........2 teddy bears, PMSL!

Solent Shrimp: Lots of interesting comments at the bottom of the article.

I think I've only got the last 7 or 8 hours of comments and then you get the general idea.

"lock em up" , "Close the Tunnel" , variations on the "benefits claiming (theme)", "Shut the borders" , "Send them Back" ... perhaps the only interesting one is "Trainee Labour Voters(Migrants)" from a chap in Cambridgeshire.

I would guess the reason your only seeing "fit young men", your phrase not mine, is its much harder for your elderly, sick, the very young and females to climb fences and try to attach themselves to fast moving vehicles ?

How to confuse a Daily Mail reader...

slackAlice2 wrote:
I would guess the reason your only seeing "fit young men", your phrase not mine, is its much harder for your elderly, sick, the very young and females to climb fences and try to attach themselves to fast moving vehicles ?

I guess it's because very few of the eldely, sick, or the very young could have survived such a long jouney all the way to Calais.

SolentShrimp wrote:I guess it's because very few of the eldely, sick, or the very young could have survived such a long jouney all the way to Calais.

Bloody hell, either someone's hacked SolentShrimp's account or he's taken a step forward in his understanding?

My guess is, he's with TalkTalk...

SolentShrimp

I guess it's because very few of the eldely, sick, or the very young could have survived such a long jouney all the way to Calais.

That as well .

Seeking asylum on children's bicycles http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-34602208

These also seem to be predominantly "fit young men" as well. Bizarre situation !
Don't know if the Mail Online has covered it ...yet ? !

It's old news about the bikes. I read about in an English language rag in Vietnam a few weeks ago.

this is a football thread!!

The distinction between asylum seekers and refugees

There is much confusion in the media and in public debate generally about asylum seekers, refugees and economic migrants, they are two different things.

"Asylum seeker" means a person who has applied for asylum under the 1951 Refugee Convention on the Status of Refugees on the ground that if he is returned to his country of origin he has a well-founded fear of persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, political belief or membership of a particular social group. He remains an asylum seeker for so long as his application or an appeal against refusal of his application is pending.

"Refugee" in this context means an asylum seeker whose application has been successful. In its broader context it means a person fleeing e.g. civil war or natural disaster but not necessarily fearing persecution as defined by the 1951 Refugee Convention.

"Economic migrant" means a person who has left his own country and seeks by lawful or unlawful means to find employment in another country.

lets not get confussed, with refugees and migrants.

George Dawes wrote:this is a football thread!!

Not quite George. Shrimpsvoices is a football forum that allows non-Morecambe related topics to be posted as Off-Topic (O/T) threads. O/T threads should be prefixed O/T on the Subject line, like this one.

A lot of football forums [and other forums] have sub-forums, so that people can, if they want to, just avoid all the O/T stuff.

No doubt some of O/T stuff mixed in with Morecambe stuff on Shrimpsvoices doesn't appeal to some users, and I'm sure it wouldn't take Keith long to open a general Off-Topic sub-forum. We'd all be happy [ ] then.

George Dawes wrote:There is much confusion in the media and in public debate generally about asylum seekers, refugees and economic migrants, they are two different things.

"Asylum seeker" means a person who has applied for asylum under the 1951 Refugee Convention on the Status of Refugees on the ground that if he is returned to his country of origin he has a well-founded fear of persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, political belief or membership of a particular social group. He remains an asylum seeker for so long as his application or an appeal against refusal of his application is pending.

"Refugee" in this context means an asylum seeker whose application has been successful. In its broader context it means a person fleeing e.g. civil war or natural disaster but not necessarily fearing persecution as defined by the 1951 Refugee Convention.

"Economic migrant" means a person who has left his own country and seeks by lawful or unlawful means to find employment in another country.

lets not get confussed, with refugees and migrants.

'Economic Migrants' aren't stupid George. They're generally very well informed about the various fears of persecution of an 'Asylum seeker', and it's not too difficult for them to claim that they fall into one or more of the categories you mention. Single men can simply say 'I'm Gay', and as you don't know or can't prove where they've come from, then bingo they fall into a persecuted group!

Many [most] don't have any Identification Papers, so you don't know who they really are or where they've come from. So they can spin any story they like, and many do. And I suspect it's very difficult for the authorities to disprove their claim.

Once these people are in your country, and if they aren't kept in secure accommodation, they can disappear into the Black Economy, and far too many do. Some will have criminal records or be criminals without a record, some could be carrying a dormant transportable illness/disease, some will be terrorists, the list goes on.

'Refugees', ie approved 'Asylum Seekers' are a different kettle of fish. In small numbers they're manageable. But with the current numbers, and through no fault of the majority of them, they are and will cause a lot of problems for their hosts.

That's my [brief] slant on it anyway. Fwiw my son is an Immigration Liaison Officer in one of our larger Embassies in the Middle East. He'll be home in a couple of weeks on leave, so I'll be picking his brains about what really goes on, and some of the tricks of the Asylum Seeker trade.

not disagreeing or agreeing Peter, id just got back home, been out for a meal, and read this thread.

this is an everyday topic, its on the tv, the talk at work and when your out, and on late night tv and sunday morning programs, and people going on and on dont seem to know the difference with the two.

i tend to think the genuine ones are at the other side of Europe, seen the state of them city's in Syria? like horrific images from WW2.

although the ones in Calais are a mix, mainly evonomic one's, its been a problem there for ages, i was last there in the world cup france 98, there were a few thousands back then(and no wars going on) the problem as never realy gone away.

im starting to think, better off not watching the news, its depressing, and take an attitude and have narrow out look in life of where you live and work and dont look beyond.

George Dawes wrote:Although the ones in Calais are a mix, mainly evonomic one's, its been a problem there for ages, i was last there in the world cup france 98, there were a few thousands back then...

Me and Doris were there for the World Cup in France'98 too.
I was working in the British Embassy in Paris, and Doris was the Passport Queen in the Consulate.

The Scottish Tartan Army were causing the Consulate extra work every morning running up to the start of the competition, and for the short time they remained in it.

By 0900 there'd be a bedraggled queue of them [distressed Scots] waiting for the Consulate to open. They were flying The Saltire in true Scottish tradition, a reyt bedraggled lot, who'd either...

- Lost their wallet.
- Lost their Passport.
- Lost their train or air ticket
- Been mugged.
- Missed their transport.
- Lost their mates, and forgotten where their hotel was.

Rab C would have been proud.

Had the privilege of sitting next to this bloke for the opening game between Scotland and Brazil.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tony_Banks,_Baron_Stratford

Despite his ministerial position he never got an official invite to attend the match. But he enjoyed our company in the Embassy bar much more though.

Happy days.

George Dawes wrote:not disagreeing or agreeing Peter, id just got back home, been out for a meal, and read this thread.

this is an everyday topic, its on the tv, the talk at work and when your out, and on late night tv and sunday morning programs, and people going on and on dont seem to know the difference with the two.

i tend to think the genuine ones are at the other side of Europe, seen the state of them city's in Syria? like horrific images from WW2.

although the ones in Calais are a mix, mainly evonomic one's, its been a problem there for ages, i was last there in the world cup france 98, there were a few thousands back then(and no wars going on) the problem as never realy gone away.

im starting to think, better off not watching the news, its depressing, and take an attitude and have narrow out look in life of where you live and work and dont look beyond.

George, this isn't having a go at you personally, but if people are taking this approach, then I think it's time to worry. I was more narrow minded - I have voted for UKIP in a european election (I hope you're taking note Peter ) when I was a little younger, but I find myself becoming more moderate as I get older. I think it's imortant you do watch the news, but don't merely take one version. The BBC does seem to have a slight socialist bias, but not big time (to my mind at least). I balance this with the Times, which employs both left and right wing biased journalists - Philip Collins, Caitlin Moran, to a lesser extent Giles Coren (honestly) all have a left wing bias. Daniel Finkelstein is a former Tory speechwriter and Matthew Parrish is a former Tory MP (and a gay pensioner who is an acknowledged Europhobe). All the above I read, to get a balanced view, dismissing any obvious political bias, and make my own decision. The worst thing about what I've highlighted in your quote is 'have a narrow outlook in life'. NO! Please don't be narrow. Taking it briefly back to football, Mrs A and I had a long and meaningful conversation with two young Orient fans this lunchtime in the Palatine. They even offered to buy us a drink. The point there is, just because someone has a different point of view, don't switch off, listen, because they might have something to say that is worthwhile. Hitler had a narrow point of view, Stalin had a narrow point of view, Kim Jong Un has a narrow point of view. Think who you are inadvertently comparing yourself to, and try to see other points of view. There isn't one right answer to the complex questions.

By the way, it's a serious pain in the a&*e stting on this fence.

Phil Anderer wrote: There isn't one right answer to the complex questions.
By the way, it's a serious pain in the a&*e stting on this fence.

Phil, come on, budge around a bit on that fence.
How do you think it'll pan out in Calais?

Phil: I agree with your post entirely except one thing.

I now pretty much only watch Ch4 News or occasionally, Newsnight. The BBC is actually increasingly 'right' leaning. I think they have become so scared of the continual threats from the government regarding the TV Licence, they are far less inclined to challenge the establishment (and the BBC ARE establishment anyway). Recently I watched Ch4 News which had an in depth report on the refugee crisis. It was the day that the train in Hungary was diverted to a different station. I then watched BBC News at 10pm because I wanted to see the programme following it. I was appalled by the BBC's treatment of the very same story. There was one part where they used exactly the same scene as Ch4 had, but they were more 'zoomed in' and the piece was cut, so that it looked like there were only men there and that they were refusing food & water.

They also didn't report that 'legitimate' foreigners were let off the train, taken to a waiting train and then taken back to complete their journey. It was this connivence that caused the anger when the authorities gave them food & water. By presenting the story in this manner, they appeared to be only men and very ungrateful of help, rather than men, women & children who'd been tricked by the authorities and therefore legitimately angry & distrustful. The BBC TV news is a shadow of its former self

Phil Anderer

but I find myself becoming more moderate as I get older.

Don't know about moderate Phil ;I find myself more empathetic , in my case more so since I became a parent.
I rarely read newspapers, occasionally get the little independent tabloid but it doesn't really form my opinions on the migration crisis. Whats that saying a "picture is worth a thousand words" images of Syria , Libya, Afghanistan et al and you don't really need somebody with a microphone to tell you that it just wouldn't be possible, safe, fair to live and bring a family up in those conditions.

No schools, Shops, medical facilities, electricity, clean water, work, food , safety - nothing we would take for granted in this country. So I would do everything within my power to set off with what was left of my home and family and seek safety and a new life - who wouldn't ?

I also find listening to individuals accounts , the story of Noujain Mustaffa a 16 yr old Syrian girl who made her way from Kobane to Dortmund in a wheelchair (BBC's Fergal Keane) inspirational. I hope that doesn't turn out to be 'staged'.

Similarly with the 'economic migrant' a phrase that has become almost synonymous with scrounger . If I was living in a country with nothing, absolutely nothing, and no prospects of work, again I'd be off to somewhere were I could make a life for myself and my family.
The UK is usually in the top 10 of any world economy's , so along with other factors it will be a destination for a lot of people but not the only country.

There is a limit to what we can do financially and practically , but we must do more as a nation. Of course there are criminals and liars amongst the numbers but that has to be addressed. The other nations Germany and Sweden seem to be tackling the problems, difficult though it must be.

But simply sitting in the relative comfort of our British homes stating we have too many people here or we've done enough already is wrong and smacks of 'I'm alright Jack'. Put yourself in their shoes. How desperate would you need to be to set off with young children and give your life savings to a trafficker and set sail in an overcrowded boat for the chance of a new life ?

slackAlice2 wrote:Similarly with the 'economic migrant' a phrase that has become almost synonymous with scrounger . If I was living in a country with nothing, absolutely nothing, and no prospects of work, again I'd be off to somewhere were I could make a life for myself and my family.
The UK is usually in the top 10 of any world economy's , so along with other factors it will be a destination for a lot of people but not the only country.

Thousands of Economic Migrants were already in Europe in the Black Economy. Now they've got what they are hoping will be an easy way into the land of milk and honey, where the streets are paved with gold.

slackAlice2 wrote: Of course there are criminals and liars amongst the numbers but that has to be addressed.

At what stage should that problem be addressed? Let them into UK first? Don't think so!

slackAlice2 wrote:The other nations Germany and Sweden seem to be tackling the problems, difficult though it must be.

Do you really think so? For example...

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2015/10/2 ... GF20151022

slackAlice2 wrote:But simply sitting in the relative comfort of our British homes stating we have too many people here or we've done enough already is wrong and smacks of 'I'm alright Jack'.

You're welcome to your opinion. The British public is very generous, always has been and always will be. How much is the annual 'ring-fenced' Financial Aid budget, as well as the Humanitarian Aid cost? How much does it cost the UK tax payer to keep RN ships patrolling, and looking out to rescue these poor wretches?

Which African countries are taking in Asylum Seekers? Which Gulf countries? Why is Saudi Arabia funding the building of so many new mosques in Europe? There's an empty air-conditioned tented city in Saudi Arabia called Mina. It can comfortably accommodate 2 million, but it's only used for 2 weeks a year.

slackAlice2 wrote: Put yourself in their shoes. How desperate would you need to be to set off with young children and give your life savings to a trafficker and set sail in an overcrowded boat for the chance of a new life ?

Do you not think many have been duped by the traffickers, and those aligned to them? Promised this, and promised that! On who's authority? Sadly those that have been duped are learning the reality of those false promises.

I'd be interested to read what BoroRedShrimp has to to say!

SolentShrimp

You're welcome to your opinion.

Thanks.

And I don't have the answers to your numerous questions; its going to take greater minds than mine and yours to sort it out.
I would suggest it needs leaders talking to each other sensibly about quotas , some countries won't help, full stop , there's nothing you can do about that.
If ever a situation needed the 'Community of Nations' pulling together its this one.
Europe's all over the place on what to do next. The British public will need to keep being generous and I still believe we need to do more, put pressure on leaders, but that's just my opinion again.

What's your solution then, just round up the 'Traffickers' ? and build lots of very high fences ? Sorted ?

Do you not think many have been duped by the traffickers, and those aligned to them? Promised this, and promised that! On who's authority? Sadly those that have been duped are learning the reality of those false promises.

Yeah I do think that criminals will have taken advantage of vulnerable and ill informed desperate people. Sickening to think about and we'll never hear all the horrific accounts will we , but we can probably guess most of it.

SolentShrimp wrote:Which African countries are taking in Asylum Seekers? Which Gulf countries? Why is Saudi Arabia funding the building of so many new mosques in Europe? There's an empty air-conditioned tented city in Saudi Arabia called Mina. It can comfortably accommodate 2 million, but it's only used for 2 weeks a year.

Peter, stop being a dick. You know EXACTLY why the Saudi regime isn't helping. You spent much of your career over there, part of the British machine that sucks up to the odious despots. If they didn't have oil we'd view them as being worse than North Korea. But they have, so we suck up to them and bend over for them.

You know they are funding the terrorist. You know they are behind ISIS. You know that Saudi Arabia is Sunni (or more to the point, Wahhabi, 'extreme Sunni') and they basically hate Shia Muslims.

So you know fine well why they aren't helping. Stop stirring.