Apparently the UK government has paid Rwanda £250M to take asylum seekers who arrive by boat. This excludes flights, temporary accommodation etc.
Would it not be cheaper just to bung, sorry pay them £5,000 each to go home [or somewhere else]. If one reckons there are about 50k unprocessed ATM that could be cheaper...
Apparently the UK government has paid Rwanda £250M to take asylum seekers who arrive
by boat. This excludes flights, temporary accommodation etc.
Would it not be cheaper just to bung, sorry pay them £5,000 each to go home
Apparently the UK government has paid Rwanda £250M to take asylum
seekers who arrive by boat. This excludes flights, temporary
accommodation etc.
Would it not be cheaper just to bung, sorry pay them £5,000 each to go
home [or somewhere else]. If one reckons there are about 50k
unprocessed ATM that could be cheaper...
Apparently the UK government has paid Rwanda £250M to take asylum
seekers who arrive by boat. This excludes flights, temporary
accommodation etc.
Would it not be cheaper just to bung, sorry pay them £5,000 each to
go home [or somewhere else]. If one reckons there are about 50k
unprocessed ATM that could be cheaper...
Apparently the UK government has paid Rwanda £250M to take asylum seekers who arrive by boat. This excludes flights, temporary accommodation etc.
Would it not be cheaper just to bung, sorry pay them £5,000 each to go home [or somewhere else]. If one reckons there are about 50k unprocessed
ATM that could be cheaper...
Apparently the UK government has paid Rwanda 250M to take asylum
seekers who arrive by boat. This excludes flights, temporary
accommodation etc.
Would it not be cheaper just to bung, sorry pay them 5,000 each to
go home [or somewhere else]. If one reckons there are about 50k
unprocessed ATM that could be cheaper...
Apparently the UK government has paid Rwanda £250M to take asylum
seekers who arrive by boat. This excludes flights, temporary
accommodation etc.
Would it not be cheaper just to bung, sorry pay them £5,000 each to go
home [or somewhere else]. If one reckons there are about 50k
unprocessed ATM that could be cheaper...
On Fri, 08 Dec 2023 07:04:27 -0800, notya...@gmail.com wrote:
Apparently the UK government has paid Rwanda £250M to take asylum
seekers who arrive by boat. This excludes flights, temporary
accommodation etc.
Would it not be cheaper just to bung, sorry pay them £5,000 each to go
home [or somewhere else]. If one reckons there are about 50k
unprocessed ATM that could be cheaper...
We and our 'allies' have caused this huge middle eastern migration
because of destruction of their countries. I expect Assad and co are
laughing his socks off.
On 15:04 8 Dec 2023, notya...@gmail.com said:
Apparently the UK government has paid Rwanda £250M to take asylum
seekers who arrive by boat. This excludes flights, temporary
accommodation etc.
Would it not be cheaper just to bung, sorry pay them £5,000 each to
go home [or somewhere else]. If one reckons there are about 50k
unprocessed ATM that could be cheaper...
The cost of housing asylum seekers in hotels is now £8m a day. Maybe
there's some saving to be made there. The Daily Mail seems to think so.
On Fri, 08 Dec 2023 07:04:27 -0800, notya...@gmail.com wrote:
Apparently the UK government has paid Rwanda £250M to take asylum
seekers who arrive by boat. This excludes flights, temporary
accommodation etc.
Would it not be cheaper just to bung, sorry pay them £5,000 each to go
home [or somewhere else]. If one reckons there are about 50k
unprocessed ATM that could be cheaper...
We have to remember the initial number of asylum seekers intended for
Rwanda is 200. So this is over a million quid per person.
On 08/12/2023 15:04, notya...@gmail.com wrote:
Apparently the UK government has paid Rwanda £250M to take asylum
seekers who arrive by boat. This excludes flights, temporary
accommodation etc.
Would it not be cheaper just to bung, sorry pay them £5,000 each to go
home [or somewhere else]. If one reckons there are about 50k
unprocessed ATM that could be cheaper...
I'm sure there are some African countries where we could lease land in
the same way Hong Kong and Guantánamo Bay were/are leased.
That way it could be UK soil and UK jurisdiction and probably work out cheaper in the long-run.
On Fri, 08 Dec 2023 17:10:22 +0000, Fredxx wrote:
On 08/12/2023 15:04, notya...@gmail.com wrote:
Apparently the UK government has paid Rwanda £250M to take asylum
seekers who arrive by boat. This excludes flights, temporary
accommodation etc.
Would it not be cheaper just to bung, sorry pay them £5,000 each to go
home [or somewhere else]. If one reckons there are about 50k
unprocessed ATM that could be cheaper...
I'm sure there are some African countries where we could lease land in
the same way Hong Kong and Guantánamo Bay were/are leased.
That way it could be UK soil and UK jurisdiction and probably work out
cheaper in the long-run.
I don't think you have been following.
As long as these people are in the remit of UK jurisdiction, the UK has obligations. In a nutshell this is the crux of the SCOTUK case. A close analogy would be if you tried to evict your child from your home. You
still owe them a duty of care.
The UK in the form of a Tory government is trying - increasingly
desperately - to engineer a situation where these people are not under UK jurisdiction. And therefore have no claim against the UK government.
And
if the proposed "let's repeal all human rights laws" suggestion gets
enacted then the UK government will owe none of us a duty of care. Since human rights are effectively a statement of that.
Just kicking them off a plane in a foreign country against their will
doesn't suddenly sever this obligation. No matter what pieces of paper
you try to bamboozle slightly dim people with.
Now if the UK hadn't deliberately broken it's asylum system, it would
have been a lot easier to have got to the point where we could
confidently pass asylum seekers to a safe third country.
Apparently the UK government has paid Rwanda £250M to take asylum seekers who arrive by boat. This excludes flights, temporary accommodation etc.
Would it not be cheaper just to bung, sorry pay them £5,000 each to go home [or somewhere else]. If one reckons there are about 50k unprocessed ATM that could be cheaper...
On 08/12/2023 15:04, notya...@gmail.com wrote:
Apparently the UK government has paid Rwanda £250M to take asylumISTR a similar question about the the Falklands War, whether it wouldn't
seekers who arrive by boat. This excludes flights, temporary
accommodation etc.
Would it not be cheaper just to bung, sorry pay them £5,000 each to go
home [or somewhere else]. If one reckons there are about 50k
unprocessed ATM that could be cheaper...
have been cheaper to pay the islanders all to relocate and just let
Argentina have the islands.
On Sat, 09 Dec 2023 09:23:19 +0000, Colin Bignell wrote:
On 08/12/2023 15:04, notya...@gmail.com wrote:
Apparently the UK government has paid Rwanda £250M to take asylumISTR a similar question about the the Falklands War, whether it wouldn't
seekers who arrive by boat. This excludes flights, temporary
accommodation etc.
Would it not be cheaper just to bung, sorry pay them £5,000 each to go
home [or somewhere else]. If one reckons there are about 50k
unprocessed ATM that could be cheaper...
have been cheaper to pay the islanders all to relocate and just let
Argentina have the islands.
No one gave a fuck about the islanders. Not does still. Kids today think
Port Stanley is an influencer with a range of beanies.
The location of the Falklands makes them a useful asset when claiming the drilling rights that are still keenly waiting to be exploited.
On 08/12/2023 17:13, jon wrote:
On Fri, 08 Dec 2023 07:04:27 -0800, notya...@gmail.com wrote:
Apparently the UK government has paid Rwanda £250M to take asylum
seekers who arrive by boat. This excludes flights, temporary
accommodation etc.
Would it not be cheaper just to bung, sorry pay them £5,000 each to
go home [or somewhere else]. If one reckons there are about 50k
unprocessed ATM that could be cheaper...
We and our 'allies' have caused this huge middle eastern migration
because of destruction of their countries. I expect Assad and co are
laughing his socks off.
You've hit the nail on the head. It is ironic that we create the
refugee crisis in many countries, then whinge of the consequences.
On 21:47 8 Dec 2023, Fredxx said:
On 08/12/2023 17:13, jon wrote:
On Fri, 08 Dec 2023 07:04:27 -0800, notya...@gmail.com wrote:
Apparently the UK government has paid Rwanda £250M to take asylum
seekers who arrive by boat. This excludes flights, temporary
accommodation etc.
Would it not be cheaper just to bung, sorry pay them £5,000 each to
go home [or somewhere else]. If one reckons there are about 50k
unprocessed ATM that could be cheaper...
We and our 'allies' have caused this huge middle eastern migration
because of destruction of their countries. I expect Assad and co are
laughing his socks off.
You've hit the nail on the head. It is ironic that we create the
refugee crisis in many countries, then whinge of the consequences.
Gov.uk lists the nationality of small boat immigrants as: Albanians,
Afghans, Iranians, Iraqis, Syrians (in decreasing order).
With the exception of Iraq and Afghanistan, there's little British involvement in these countries. Iraq was a cockup but Al Quaeda was a terrorist threat and had also imposed a brutal rule on the Afghans.
http://tiny.cc/irreg_mig (fig. 4)
On 10 Dec 2023 at 14:35:26 GMT, "Pamela"
<uklm@permabulator.33mail.com> wrote:
On 21:47 8 Dec 2023, Fredxx said:
On 08/12/2023 17:13, jon wrote:
On Fri, 08 Dec 2023 07:04:27 -0800, notya...@gmail.com wrote:
Apparently the UK government has paid Rwanda 250M to take asylum
seekers who arrive by boat. This excludes flights, temporary
accommodation etc.
Would it not be cheaper just to bung, sorry pay them 5,000 each
to go home [or somewhere else]. If one reckons there are about
50k unprocessed ATM that could be cheaper...
We and our 'allies' have caused this huge middle eastern migration
because of destruction of their countries. I expect Assad and co
are laughing his socks off.
You've hit the nail on the head. It is ironic that we create the
refugee crisis in many countries, then whinge of the consequences.
Gov.uk lists the nationality of small boat immigrants as: Albanians,
Afghans, Iranians, Iraqis, Syrians (in decreasing order).
With the exception of Iraq and Afghanistan, there's little British
involvement in these countries. Iraq was a cockup but Al Quaeda was a
terrorist threat and had also imposed a brutal rule on the Afghans.
http://tiny.cc/irreg_mig (fig. 4)
We had plenty of involvement in Iran and they have been suffering the consequences for more than fifty years. Al Quaeda did not impose
anything on Afghanistan. They were tolerated by the Taliban but not responsible for them. In fact it was the Americans who imposed the
Taliban on Afghanistan, to attack the Russians. The Taliban were not particularly interested in attacking the West. And we may not have
done much to the Syrians but our pals the Americans certainly did.
Albanians are not so much of a problem in that if we catch them we can
send them back.
On 17:10 10 Dec 2023, Roger Hayter said:
On 10 Dec 2023 at 14:35:26 GMT, "Pamela"
<uklm@permabulator.33mail.com> wrote:
On 21:47 8 Dec 2023, Fredxx said:
On 08/12/2023 17:13, jon wrote:
On Fri, 08 Dec 2023 07:04:27 -0800, notya...@gmail.com wrote:
Apparently the UK government has paid Rwanda Ģ250M to take asylum >>>>>> seekers who arrive by boat. This excludes flights, temporary
accommodation etc.
Would it not be cheaper just to bung, sorry pay them Ģ5,000 each
to go home [or somewhere else]. If one reckons there are about
50k unprocessed ATM that could be cheaper...
We and our 'allies' have caused this huge middle eastern migration
because of destruction of their countries. I expect Assad and co
are laughing his socks off.
You've hit the nail on the head. It is ironic that we create the
refugee crisis in many countries, then whinge of the consequences.
Gov.uk lists the nationality of small boat immigrants as: Albanians,
Afghans, Iranians, Iraqis, Syrians (in decreasing order).
With the exception of Iraq and Afghanistan, there's little British
involvement in these countries. Iraq was a cockup but Al Quaeda was a
terrorist threat and had also imposed a brutal rule on the Afghans.
http://tiny.cc/irreg_mig (fig. 4)
We had plenty of involvement in Iran and they have been suffering the
consequences for more than fifty years. Al Quaeda did not impose
anything on Afghanistan. They were tolerated by the Taliban but not
responsible for them. In fact it was the Americans who imposed the
Taliban on Afghanistan, to attack the Russians. The Taliban were not
particularly interested in attacking the West. And we may not have
done much to the Syrians but our pals the Americans certainly did.
Albanians are not so much of a problem in that if we catch them we can
send them back.
I wouldn't say Iranian refugees are coming here today on account of
British involvement over 50 years ago. UK involvement kept Iran in
relatively good shape and we even hosted their students in the UK, as I recall at my local college at the time.
However the religious
leadership, who opposed westernisation, organised the revolution and the country then went to pieces.
Yes, I should have referred to the Taliban in Afghanistan rather than Al Quaeda. Although anti-American westerners see our military involvement
in Afghanistan as malign, I tend to view it as wanting a positive
outcome for the population. Sadly it dragged on for years and years
before Trump/Biden decided to leave in a rush.
On 11 Dec 2023 at 12:40:42 GMT, "Pamela" <uklm@permabulator.33mail.com> wrote:
I wouldn't say Iranian refugees are coming here today on account of
British involvement over 50 years ago. UK involvement kept Iran in
relatively good shape and we even hosted their students in the UK, as I
recall at my local college at the time.
Great shape for a murderous totalitarian dictatorship! I don't expect you saw the dead students whose families argued with the secret police. What do you think led to the fundamentalist revolution?
Roger Hayter <roger@hayter.org> wrote:
On 11 Dec 2023 at 12:40:42 GMT, "Pamela" <uklm@permabulator.33mail.com> wrote:
I wouldn't say Iranian refugees are coming here today on account of
British involvement over 50 years ago. UK involvement kept Iran in
relatively good shape and we even hosted their students in the UK, as I
recall at my local college at the time.
Great shape for a murderous totalitarian dictatorship! I don't expect you saw
the dead students whose families argued with the secret police. What do you >> think led to the fundamentalist revolution?
So you seem to be saying that things are now better under a murderous fundamentalist theocracy.
On 11 Dec 2023 at 16:59:12 GMT, "Spike" <aero.spike@mail.com> wrote:
Roger Hayter <roger@hayter.org> wrote:
On 11 Dec 2023 at 12:40:42 GMT, "Pamela" <uklm@permabulator.33mail.com> wrote:
I wouldn't say Iranian refugees are coming here today on account of
British involvement over 50 years ago. UK involvement kept Iran in
relatively good shape and we even hosted their students in the UK, as I >>>> recall at my local college at the time.
Great shape for a murderous totalitarian dictatorship! I don't expect you saw
the dead students whose families argued with the secret police. What do you >>> think led to the fundamentalist revolution?
So you seem to be saying that things are now better under a murderous
fundamentalist theocracy.
Do I? This seems to be a product of vivid imagination. Nothing I said could rationally have led you to believe that.
On Monday 11 December 2023 at 19:35:58 UTC, Roger Hayter wrote:Certainly do what?
On 11 Dec 2023 at 16:59:12 GMT, "Spike" <aero....@mail.com> wrote:
Roger Hayter <ro...@hayter.org> wrote:Do I? This seems to be a product of vivid imagination. Nothing I said could >> rationally have led you to believe that.
On 11 Dec 2023 at 12:40:42 GMT, "Pamela" <uk...@permabulator.33mail.com> wrote:
I wouldn't say Iranian refugees are coming here today on account of
British involvement over 50 years ago. UK involvement kept Iran in
relatively good shape and we even hosted their students in the UK, as I >>>>> recall at my local college at the time.
Great shape for a murderous totalitarian dictatorship! I don't expect you saw
the dead students whose families argued with the secret police. What do you
think led to the fundamentalist revolution?
So you seem to be saying that things are now better under a murderous
fundamentalist theocracy.
Maybe not, but plenty of [reliable IMO] reports of hundreds of peaceful protestors being murders in cold blood certainly do: - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deaths_during_the_Mahsa_Amini_protests#List_of_victims
https://www.iranintl.com/en/202301240166
On Monday 11 December 2023 at 19:35:58 UTC, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 11 Dec 2023 at 16:59:12 GMT, "Spike" <aero....@mail.com> wrote:
Roger Hayter <ro...@hayter.org> wrote:
On 11 Dec 2023 at 12:40:42 GMT, "Pamela" <uk...@permabulator.33mail.com> wrote:
I wouldn't say Iranian refugees are coming here today on account of
British involvement over 50 years ago. UK involvement kept Iran in
relatively good shape and we even hosted their students in the UK, as I >>>>> recall at my local college at the time.
Great shape for a murderous totalitarian dictatorship! I don't expect you saw
the dead students whose families argued with the secret police. What do you
think led to the fundamentalist revolution?
So you seem to be saying that things are now better under a murderous
fundamentalist theocracy.
Do I? This seems to be a product of vivid imagination. Nothing I said could >> rationally have led you to believe that.
Maybe not, but plenty of [reliable IMO] reports of hundreds of peaceful protestors being murdered in cold blood certainly do: -
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deaths_during_the_Mahsa_Amini_protests#List_of_victims
https://www.iranintl.com/en/202301240166
notya...@gmail.com <notyalckram@gmail.com> wrote:
On Monday 11 December 2023 at 19:35:58 UTC, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 11 Dec 2023 at 16:59:12 GMT, "Spike" <aero....@mail.com> wrote:
Roger Hayter <ro...@hayter.org> wrote:
On 11 Dec 2023 at 12:40:42 GMT, "Pamela"
<uk...@permabulator.33mail.com> wrote:
I wouldn't say Iranian refugees are coming here today on account
of British involvement over 50 years ago. UK involvement kept
Iran in relatively good shape and we even hosted their students
in the UK, as I recall at my local college at the time.
Great shape for a murderous totalitarian dictatorship! I don't
expect you saw the dead students whose families argued with the
secret police. What do you think led to the fundamentalist
revolution?
So you seem to be saying that things are now better under a
murderous fundamentalist theocracy.
Do I? This seems to be a product of vivid imagination. Nothing I
said could rationally have led you to believe that.
Maybe not, but plenty of [reliable IMO] reports of hundreds of
peaceful protestors being murdered in cold blood certainly do: -
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deaths_during_the_Mahsa_Amini_
protests#List_of_victims
https://www.iranintl.com/en/202301240166
I suppose that to some minds being killed by the Morality Police of a murderous theocratic government sounds better in some way than
being murdered by the secret police of a dictator. It would seem that
the people of Iran have been harshly served by both forms of
government, both deserving of condemnation.
On Tuesday 12 December 2023 at 18:06:57 UTC, Pamela wrote:
On 09:24 12 Dec 2023, Spike said:
notya...@gmail.com <notya...@gmail.com> wrote:
SNIP
I sometimes wonder if Saddam Hussein's brutal way of keeping a lid on
dissent wasn't better for Iraq as a whole than the endless bloody
incidents under the Western-assisted administrations.
You mean like gassing a whole village of ~5,000 with Sarin?
On Tuesday 12 December 2023 at 18:06:57 UTC, Pamela wrote:
On 09:24 12 Dec 2023, Spike said:
notya...@gmail.com <notya...@gmail.com> wrote:
SNIP
I sometimes wonder if Saddam Hussein's brutal way of keeping a lid on
dissent wasn't better for Iraq as a whole than the endless bloody
incidents under the Western-assisted administrations.
You mean like gassing a whole village of ~5,000 with Sarin?
On 13/12/2023 11:41, notya...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday 12 December 2023 at 18:06:57 UTC, Pamela wrote:
On 09:24 12 Dec 2023, Spike said:
notya...@gmail.com <notya...@gmail.com> wrote:
SNIP
I sometimes wonder if Saddam Hussein's brutal way of keeping a lid on >>>dissent wasn't better for Iraq as a whole than the endless bloody >>>incidents under the Western-assisted administrations.
You mean like gassing a whole village of ~5,000 with Sarin?
Perhaps the good nations such as the UK and USA should have bombed Iraq to >punish Saddam for murdering those 5000 people in Halabja.
But by the same token, maybe we should now be bombing Israel. Surely it's >arguable.
On 11:41 13 Dec 2023, notya...@gmail.com said:
On Tuesday 12 December 2023 at 18:06:57 UTC, Pamela wrote:
On 09:24 12 Dec 2023, Spike said:
notya...@gmail.com <notya...@gmail.com> wrote:
I sometimes wonder if Saddam Hussein's brutal way of keeping a lid on
dissent wasn't better for Iraq as a whole than the endless bloody
incidents under the Western-assisted administrations.
You mean like gassing a whole village of ~5,000 with Sarin?
Appalling atrocities like that were surpassed by unnecessary civilian
deaths after Saddam. It's tens of thousands before compared to hundreds
of thousands after.
I believe Bush and Blair acted correctly based on the poor information
they had but I wonder how much better off Iraqis are for it.
On 11:41 13 Dec 2023, notya...@gmail.com said:
On Tuesday 12 December 2023 at 18:06:57 UTC, Pamela wrote:
On 09:24 12 Dec 2023, Spike said:
notya...@gmail.com <notya...@gmail.com> wrote:
SNIP
I sometimes wonder if Saddam Hussein's brutal way of keeping a lid on
dissent wasn't better for Iraq as a whole than the endless bloody
incidents under the Western-assisted administrations.
You mean like gassing a whole village of ~5,000 with Sarin?
Appalling atrocities like that were surpassed by unnecessary civilian
deaths after Saddam. It's tens of thousands before compared to hundreds
of thousands after.
I believe Bush and Blair acted correctly based on the poor information
they had but I wonder how much better off Iraqis are for it.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 300 |
| Nodes: | 16 (3 / 13) |
| Uptime: | 44:55:00 |
| Calls: | 6,710 |
| Calls today: | 3 |
| Files: | 12,243 |
| Messages: | 5,354,113 |