Channel Tunnel: '2,000 migrants' tried to enter

a reply to: ForteanOrg

So, why then are you against this?

Do you think it's a good idea to take immigrants into your country, when they threaten lorry drivers in Calais with knives?

Would you want that type of person to come into your country? I certainly wouldn't.

originally posted by: alldaylong
a reply to: ForteanOrgDo you think it's a good idea to take immigrants into your country, when they threaten lorry drivers in Calais with knives? Would you want that type of person to come into your country? I certainly wouldn't.

Well, firstly the overwhelming majority of these people do not threaten anybody, let alone with knives. Yes, there are undoubtedly criminals amongst them, like there are undoubtedly criminals amongst the people of any nation. They should be dealt with, of course: there is a justice system in England, and it seems to work quite well, methinks.

Also, you're quite a good example of what I meant in my previous post: you fearmongering. You seem to be afraid of them, but you'd be better of fearing your own government as it took away more from you in the last few decades than any illegal immigrant ever could take away from you.

But yes, I'd welcome them in our country.

But yes, I'd welcome them in our country.

Good. You have them then.

a reply to: MrCrow

Its easy to say you'll take the immigrants when you don't have the luxury of the sea as your border.

We can stop them, the rest of Europe can not, we have a choice, and I'm pleased the government agrees with the majority of British people.
Unlucky France

a reply to: grainofsand

Oooh, 'ang on. I thought that was a French person posting. Apologies for confusion!

a reply to: MrCrow

Ah no worries, the member is from the Netherlands I believe, again, leaky unguarded land border. They have no choice about immigrants entering their country either.

We do though, just the tunnel as a weak spot, but with the UK border being on the French side and our border force guarding it we have a better chance than other EU countries.

Over 30,000 attempts stopped this year so far

a reply to: Elliot

They won't get any benefits.

They are illegal immigrants. the key word being illegal.

illegal entry into the country means they won't receive any benefits.

What I can't work out is why are these immigrants allowed to travel all across Europe without being stopped in anyway and allowed to queue up to get to England. It's about time other European countries took responsibility reguarding the traffic of immigrants why it is the UK has to put up with it

And I can guarantee not all these immigrants are squeaky clean

Just wait we will soon have another immigrant murderer or rapist on our shores

Which country are the coming from? In Sweden we welcome Eritreans, for Libyans we advice you to The Greatest Nation on the earth Great Britain!!

originally posted by: ForteanOrg



Don't make the same mistakes Hitler made, my friend. There undoubtedly have been Jews that fitted the description the fascists made of them, but they were exceptions. Most Jews were quite decent folks. The same goes for Muslims. Somebodies religion is just one facet - it are a persons actions that make him into what he is. Banning Muslims from society is impossible - we have religious freedom.

It's got nothing to do with Hitler. That was a total different thing, don't drag it in here. Britain is Britain and has a predominately Judeo Christian heritage. What is wrong with wanting to maintain our way of life without being swamped by Muslims that have taken over ALL of north africa, ALL of the middle east and much of asia? I like Britain the way it is, we are setting a time bomb if we let Islam get to something like 33% of the population. Don't you see it? Are you blind to what happens to countries with sizeable muslim minorities. Do you not see a historical trend?

My Serbian friends think we've lost the plot in the UK be letting them in. They know full well what will happen at some point in the future.

originally posted by: ThePeaceMaker
What I can't work out is why are these immigrants allowed to travel all across Europe without being stopped in anyway and allowed to queue up to get to England.

This might help explain things:
TheGuardian.com

According to regulations, migrants arriving in Italy and Greece are supposed to stay there. But neither country wants to become home to thousands of newcomers it can’t afford to look after, and who themselves want to move on. So their governments have asked wealthier European countries to take responsibility for 40,000 of the migrants currently in Italy and Greece.

So far most other EU states won’t agree to the plan, and as a result Italy turns a blind eye to migrants leaving for France. In some cases, officials even drive them closer to Italy’s northern borders. It’s a situation that infuriates the French government, which faces a strong far-right movement, and doesn’t want the problem either.

Listening to a BBC radio phone in on the storming of Calais this morning, a guy phoned in from Calais to report he never saw one Immigrant and everything was moving as normal..HA

Do we Have a Video of the Mass Storming of Calais..?

a reply to: Soloprotocol

'Storming' is a dramatic term of course, but are you doubting that thousands of immigrants are in a shanty camp at Calais just waiting for their chance to enter the UK illegally? Really?

As I said earlier, if you don't like the international conventions on refugee/asylum seekers seeking help as soon as they reach a safe place, then maybe take it up with the UN.

The moment every one of those migrants arrived in a safe country they were required to claim asylum there.
This is because they are no longer fleeing oppression, death, or violence.
If they choose not to claim asylum as soon as they are in a safe EU country, and intend to enter the UK illegally then they are no longer refugees.

Oh, and if they claim asylum then they will be offered similar services and assistance in France as asylum seekers as they would in the UK. It is their choice to live in a shanty camp in France, and solely because they want to enter the UK illegally.

HEres a Idea. STOP RESCUING THEM and let only the strong survive the trip. then after they get ashore arrest them then send them back home with a note that they are traitors to their country and tell their government deal with them as they see fit.

Or set up blockades of the tunnels on the english end and forcefully turn them back.

originally posted by: yuppa
Or set up blockades of the tunnels on the english end and forcefully turn them back.

Nope, it is better having the border at the French side because we can always stop the train from departing in a situation such as a mass attempt.

If they can make it through the Tunnel to Kent then they just claim asylum and we have to process them until their application is decided.
Part of the reason of course is that English is a major second language for people around the world, but that is not a concern for international conventions on refugees/asylum seekers.
They are in a safe country now, France, they are no longer fleeing oppression, they are safe.

The UK government has no obligation to do anything other than lawfully defend our border.

originally posted by: grainofsand
a reply to: Soloprotocol

'Storming' is a dramatic term of course, but are you doubting that thousands of immigrants are in a shanty camp at Calais just waiting for their chance to enter the UK illegally? Really?

I dont doubt that thousands of immigrants are living in shanty camps in and around the Calais area, what i doubt is the "2000 immigrants storm Calais" nonsense.
Unless someone can provide a Video, and lets face it, Calais will have CCTV everywhere and hundreds of Employees will have Camera phones, not to mention the hundreds people waiting to use the Tunnel then the story is what it is, Media spun BS.

My guess would be the usual 20-30 people max tried to "Storm" aka, sneak into a lorry at the facility...you know. The usual. but then again...there's no story in "The Usual"

originally posted by: Soloprotocol
I dont doubt that thousands of immigrants are living in shanty camps in and around the Calais area

Yes, and all choosing to do so because they do not wish to claim asylum in the safe country they are in.
They are no longer fleeing death, oppression, or violence as an asylum seeker is, they are safe, in France.

The UK has no obligation to assist people who are in a safe country and able to claim asylum in that safe country.
If they choose not to and wish to illegally enter the UK while hanging around in France then it is right that the UK protects its border.

what i doubt is the "2000 immigrants storm Calais" nonsense.

Well, there are 3000-5000 of them hanging around the tunnel with the sole purpose of entering the UK illegally.
...and over 30,000 attempts have been stopped so far this year, so there is obviously a problem, and I'm glad the UK is attempting to secure our border with France.

The people are safe in France so they are no longer fleeing oppression, just deciding to choose which safe nation they want to live in. That ain't an option under international conventions.

originally posted by: grainofsand

originally posted by: yuppa
Or set up blockades of the tunnels on the english end and forcefully turn them back.

Nope, it is better having the border at the French side because we can always stop the train from departing in a situation such as a mass attempt.

If they can make it through the Tunnel to Kent then they just claim asylum and we have to process them until their application is decided.
Part of the reason of course is that English is a major second language for people around the world, but that is not a concern for international conventions on refugees/asylum seekers.
They are in a safe country now, France, they are no longer fleeing oppression, they are safe.

The UK government has no obligation to do anything other than lawfully defend our border.

Ok. since they are leaving a safe country then the claim of asylum can be declined on the spot. Then they could just stop granting asylum period too.

originally posted by: yuppa
Ok. since they are leaving a safe country then the claim of asylum can be declined on the spot. Then they could just stop granting asylum period too.

The challenge is that everyone who turns up in the UK claiming asylum is (rightly) entitled to a fair process of investigation before a decision is made. This can take years sometimes depending on the case.

Yep, I support increased defence of the border at the French end of the tunnel.
If these people are presenting themselves as refugees then they are already in a safe country and simply need to apply for asylum there to receive support services and assistance as they would in the UK.

All of them are choosing not to claim asylum in France because they want to illegally enter the UK.
They choose to live in their shanty camp over claiming asylum in that safe country.
They are economic migrants, not asylum seekers while they choose the shanty camp.

...and for all those who think, aw, we should feel sorry for everyone who is poor with their second language as English, and we should let them in if they make it through the leaky EU borders, I say contact the UN and ask for refugee conventions to be changed.

Right now all the UK is obligated to do is defend it's borders lawfully.

What happened to :

They are gifts of love
They bring culture and identity
They strengthen the economy
They do jobs the British won't do

all that stuff ?