|
Post by sheikhmomo on Oct 19, 2016 11:49:02 GMT
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Oct 19, 2016 11:51:01 GMT
Another concern is that adult men have clearly elbowed REAL children out of the way, to gain access to the UK. Aided and abetted by The Home Office. Why do you think that is?
|
|
|
Post by rogerjonesisgod on Oct 19, 2016 11:54:54 GMT
Daily Politics Show reporting that in the year to September 2015 out of 575 'child' immigrants checked for exact age 371 were over 18. Diane Abbott says any form of x-rays and dental checks are a violation of Human Rights. I assume those that lied have been deported? Thought not. It's impossible to know individual circumstances and some will have experienced unimaginable suffering etc..and from a humanitarian point of view, I get it. But..most will disappear into their ethnic enclaves, fail to assimilate, turn-out as required/needed employment solutions and continue to lie for a lifestyle at the British Tax payers expense. As someone who's paid Tax/Ni for over 30 years, I was a bit shocked (when I lost my job earlier in the year) to be offered the princely sum of £17pw on Job Seekers!! Apparently the wife's 16hrs a week mobile hairdressing business was sufficient to support us. Look after our own - no chance. As for "you're all racist" Diane Abbot - hearing her whining self righteousness is a violation of Human Rights. No we won't be able to deport them. If they are tested and found to be adults then they will claim asylum as an adult. Something they refused to do in France. If they claim to be Syrian then we can't deport them to a war torn country and with a promise to accept 20,000 refugees by 2020 they're now here to stay.
|
|
|
Post by bathstoke on Oct 19, 2016 11:56:26 GMT
Another concern is that adult men have clearly elbowed REAL children out of the way, to gain access to the UK. Aided and abetted by The Home Office. Why do you think that is? I dont know...
|
|
|
Post by Northy on Oct 19, 2016 12:11:42 GMT
Daily Politics Show reporting that in the year to September 2015 out of 575 'child' immigrants checked for exact age 371 were over 18. Diane Abbott says any form of x-rays and dental checks are a violation of European Human Rights. Not just Dianne Abbot, the British Dental Association have said similar. both are a set of crooks
|
|
|
Post by rogerjonesisgod on Oct 19, 2016 12:15:59 GMT
Phew.... thank God the BDA who represent dentist's who charge £60 a check up and insist I have four a year preceded by four dental hygiene visits, who are quite happy to take dental x-rays before superfluous cosmetic work and drive around in the latest porsche's have carried the 'ethical' banner for us. Although I'm not sure on what ethical grounds NHS dentists could contest suggestions from the Home Office. They could point out that these tests might not be totally reliable but ethically? I'm not so sure.
|
|
|
Post by Skankmonkey on Oct 19, 2016 12:23:57 GMT
The French are intent on closing the Calais camp. That means them dispersing the residents and finding accommodation for about 10,000 people.
If our agreement with France is to take a "token" 300 people who are nominally children, and that then expedites the closure of the camp then that is surely in everyone's interest.
Presumably we can sort out the sheep from the goats later. Let's get the camp closed.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Oct 19, 2016 12:27:26 GMT
Phew.... thank God the BDA who represent dentist's who charge £60 a check up and insist I have four a year preceded by four dental hygiene visits, who are quite happy to take dental x-rays before superfluous cosmetic work and drive around in the latest porsche's have carried the 'ethical' banner for us. Although I'm not sure on what ethical grounds NHS dentists could contest suggestions from the Home Office. They could point out that these tests might not be totally reliable but ethically? I'm not so sure. Quite, it runs quite a spectrum from Abbot to the BDA doesn't it. As a point of fact only David Davies from inside the Government has called for dental checks hasn't he. The Home Office have come out against it.
|
|
|
Post by rogerjonesisgod on Oct 19, 2016 12:31:31 GMT
The French are intent on closing the Calais camp. That means them dispersing the residents and finding accommodation for about 10,000 people.
If our agreement with France is to take a "token" 300 people who are nominally children, and that then expedites the closure of the camp then that is surely in everyone's interest.
Presumably we can sort out the sheep from the goats later. Let's get the camp closed. Sensible sentiments and closing the camp is a good thing for everyone; Calais residents, Jungle residents, lorry drivers etc, etc. Unfortunately both the sheep and goats are here to stay and as for this type of camp didn't we close down Sangatte over a decade ago? There's already talk of a new Jungle to the South of Calais and immigrants grouping near Belgian ports.
|
|
|
Post by Skankmonkey on Oct 19, 2016 12:34:40 GMT
The French are intent on closing the Calais camp. That means them dispersing the residents and finding accommodation for about 10,000 people.
If our agreement with France is to take a "token" 300 people who are nominally children, and that then expedites the closure of the camp then that is surely in everyone's interest.
Presumably we can sort out the sheep from the goats later. Let's get the camp closed. Sensible sentiments and closing the camp is a good thing for everyone; Calais residents, Jungle residents, lorry drivers etc, etc. Unfortunately both the sheep and goats are here to stay and as for this type of camp didn't we close down Sangatte over a decade ago? There's already talk of a new Jungle to the South of Calais and immigrants grouping near Belgian ports. Maybe, but let's deal with one issue at a time.
|
|
|
Post by rogerjonesisgod on Oct 19, 2016 12:45:15 GMT
Sensible sentiments and closing the camp is a good thing for everyone; Calais residents, Jungle residents, lorry drivers etc, etc. Unfortunately both the sheep and goats are here to stay and as for this type of camp didn't we close down Sangatte over a decade ago? There's already talk of a new Jungle to the South of Calais and immigrants grouping near Belgian ports. Maybe, but let's deal with one issue at a time...... at a time.......at a time........again.
|
|
|
Post by followyoudown on Oct 19, 2016 12:46:21 GMT
Phew.... thank God the BDA who represent dentist's who charge £60 a check up and insist I have four a year preceded by four dental hygiene visits, who are quite happy to take dental x-rays before superfluous cosmetic work and drive around in the latest porsche's have carried the 'ethical' banner for us. Although I'm not sure on what ethical grounds NHS dentists could contest suggestions from the Home Office. They could point out that these tests might not be totally reliable but ethically? I'm not so sure. Quite, it runs quite a spectrum from Abbot to the BDA doesn't it. As a point of fact only David Davies from inside the Government has called for dental checks hasn't he. The Home Office have come out against it. You do realise it's David Davies the backbench Welsh MP who said this and not David Davis the brexit minister as some papers were wrongly attributing.
|
|
|
Post by manmarking on Oct 19, 2016 12:50:47 GMT
I thought this thread was missing something and then I realised: it was missing a load of racist shite from carps and Harry You two are clearly not cowards. I don't doubt that. If the country were ever at war I know I could sleep soundly at night safe in the knowledge you pair would be first to volunteer for the Royal Keyboard Fusiliers Great thing is, it's a remote division - you can serve in it even when you care about your country that much that you've fucked off to live in the Canaries Anyway, haven't you brave warriors got some Asian-owned shop to brick, or a public bog door to scrawl "c18" on? says the man in the far east, you'd be sleeping soundly all the time over there. You've got me confused with someone else, shorty
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on Oct 19, 2016 12:59:20 GMT
Phew.... thank God the BDA who represent dentist's who charge £60 a check up and insist I have four a year preceded by four dental hygiene visits, who are quite happy to take dental x-rays before superfluous cosmetic work and drive around in the latest porsche's have carried the 'ethical' banner for us. Although I'm not sure on what ethical grounds NHS dentists could contest suggestions from the Home Office. They could point out that these tests might not be totally reliable but ethically? I'm not so sure. Maybe they have to extract the teeth to do the test?
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on Oct 19, 2016 13:00:38 GMT
The French are intent on closing the Calais camp. That means them dispersing the residents and finding accommodation for about 10,000 people.
If our agreement with France is to take a "token" 300 people who are nominally children, and that then expedites the closure of the camp then that is surely in everyone's interest.
Presumably we can sort out the sheep from the goats later. Let's get the camp closed. It would certainly be good to identify the kids!
|
|
|
Post by rogerjonesisgod on Oct 19, 2016 13:07:33 GMT
Phew.... thank God the BDA who represent dentist's who charge £60 a check up and insist I have four a year preceded by four dental hygiene visits, who are quite happy to take dental x-rays before superfluous cosmetic work and drive around in the latest porsche's have carried the 'ethical' banner for us. Although I'm not sure on what ethical grounds NHS dentists could contest suggestions from the Home Office. They could point out that these tests might not be totally reliable but ethically? I'm not so sure. Quite, it runs quite a spectrum from Abbot to the BDA doesn't it. As a point of fact only David Davies from inside the Government has called for dental checks hasn't he. The Home Office have come out against it. Yes, David Davies called for more stringent age checks after an asylum seeker in his constituency lied about being 12 and then assaulted his foster father. Child porn images and Jihadist website visits were found on the asylum seekers' phone and dental checks determined he was was 'somewhere between 18 and 21'. Davies claims that unless two official independent estimates put the claimant 'significantly' over the age of 18 they are 'knocked back' to 16. "Since 2006 there have been 11,121 age disputes. Of those, 4,828 were found to have been adults" - BBC website. That's 43%, or put another way 4,828 places that should have gone to genuine children. If not dental checks then what?
|
|
|
Post by rogerjonesisgod on Oct 19, 2016 13:23:34 GMT
Phew.... thank God the BDA who represent dentist's who charge £60 a check up and insist I have four a year preceded by four dental hygiene visits, who are quite happy to take dental x-rays before superfluous cosmetic work and drive around in the latest porsche's have carried the 'ethical' banner for us. Although I'm not sure on what ethical grounds NHS dentists could contest suggestions from the Home Office. They could point out that these tests might not be totally reliable but ethically? I'm not so sure. Maybe they have to extract the teeth to do the test? British Dental Journal - Dental age assessment (DAA): a simple method for children and emerging adults Apparently not. 99% confidence rate. I think it's just he BDA trying to distance its members from Looney Left accusations of being Nazi tooth pullers, possible abuse from certain sections of the public and any potential law suits.
|
|
|
Post by crapslinger on Oct 19, 2016 13:24:05 GMT
Quite, it runs quite a spectrum from Abbot to the BDA doesn't it. As a point of fact only David Davies from inside the Government has called for dental checks hasn't he. The Home Office have come out against it. Yes, David Davies called for more stringent age checks after an asylum seeker in his constituency lied about being 12 and then assaulted his foster father. Child porn images and Jihadist website visits were found on the asylum seekers' phone and dental checks determined he was was 'somewhere between 18 and 21'. Davies claims that unless two official independent estimates put the claimant 'significantly' over the age of 18 they are 'knocked back' to 16. "Since 2006 there have been 11,121 age disputes. Of those, 4,828 were found to have been adults" - BBC website. That's 43%. If not dental checks then what? Lie detectors, DNA tests on the children and their errrmmmmmmmmmm relatives to confirm blood relations if not ship the lot back to France.
|
|
|
Post by crapslinger on Oct 19, 2016 13:42:12 GMT
Daily Politics Show reporting that in the year to September 2015 out of 575 'child' immigrants checked for exact age 371 were over 18. Diane Abbott says any form of x-rays and dental checks are a violation of Human Rights. I assume those that lied have been deported? Thought not. It's impossible to know individual circumstances and some will have experienced unimaginable suffering etc..and from a humanitarian point of view, I get it. But..most will disappear into their ethnic enclaves, fail to assimilate, turn-out as required/needed employment solutions and continue to lie for a lifestyle at the British Tax payers expense. As someone who's paid Tax/Ni for over 30 years, I was a bit shocked (when I lost my job earlier in the year) to be offered the princely sum of £17pw on Job Seekers!! Apparently the wife's 16hrs a week mobile hairdressing business was sufficient to support us. Look after our own - no chance. As for "you're all racist" Diane Abbot - hearing her whining self righteousness is a violation of Human Rights. I wonder if their family's over here will have the face to claim child allowance for their offspring, though I am not sure that is legal for children over the age of thirty.
|
|
|
Post by The Drunken Communist on Oct 19, 2016 13:54:34 GMT
I wonder if their family's over here will have the face to claim child allowance for their offspring, though I am not sure that is legal for children over the age of thirty. They'll most probably get it back-dated to when the child was born... In 1974
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Oct 19, 2016 13:59:37 GMT
Yes, David Davies called for more stringent age checks after an asylum seeker in his constituency lied about being 12 and then assaulted his foster father. Child porn images and Jihadist website visits were found on the asylum seekers' phone and dental checks determined he was was 'somewhere between 18 and 21'. Davies claims that unless two official independent estimates put the claimant 'significantly' over the age of 18 they are 'knocked back' to 16. "Since 2006 there have been 11,121 age disputes. Of those, 4,828 were found to have been adults" - BBC website. That's 43%. If not dental checks then what? Lie detectors, DNA tests on the children and their errrmmmmmmmmmm relatives to confirm blood relations if not ship the lot back to France. Why back to France?
|
|
|
Post by manmarking on Oct 19, 2016 14:05:06 GMT
A lot of them are probably dead, Harry. I realise that you were born capable of crawling across an entire continent unsupported but unfortunately most little ones find it quite tough going. You're a naive little man are you cliff... are you seriously telling me that housing these men instead of the most in need is the best option ? Are you going to bring out some liberal bile of how unethical Britain is for daring to question the age of these people. Your right in one aspect, women children and the elderly aren't capable of crawling across continents to Calais, they've been left in the camps in Jordon ect. Perhaps we would've been better served taking children from those camps.... Are these "children" currently arriving from Calais the most in need of housing and care ? Simple question cliff ? Simple answer Harry - I don't know and nor do you. Neither of us is privy to any actual facts in the matter. We haven't been to the camp or spoken to the refugees or authorities concerned. And if you'd read my post to fraise on this thread you'd note that I advocated dental testing if it works as an ageing tool. The photos posted on this thread are concerning - I've agreed with that. I've just not gone off on one deciding they're all cowards, that's all
|
|
|
Post by crapslinger on Oct 19, 2016 14:40:35 GMT
Lie detectors, DNA tests on the children and their errrmmmmmmmmmm relatives to confirm blood relations if not ship the lot back to France. Why back to France? Why not that was their last port of call before the poor little lambs rocked up here.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Oct 19, 2016 14:47:38 GMT
Why not that was their last port of call before the poor little lambs rocked up here. Why are they France's "problem" any more than they're ours? I presume ultimately you want to send them back to whatever war torn hell they've escaped from and you don't agree they're refugees?
|
|
|
Post by crapslinger on Oct 19, 2016 14:53:12 GMT
Why not that was their last port of call before the poor little lambs rocked up here. Why are they France's "problem" any more than they're ours? I presume ultimately you want to send them back to whatever war torn hell they've escaped from and you don't agree they're refugees? And where would that be, we can not ascertain their true ages let alone where they have originated from, if they are true refugees why have they not sought asylum in France or any other safe country they have travelled through ????????????????
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Oct 19, 2016 14:57:36 GMT
Why are they France's "problem" any more than they're ours? I presume ultimately you want to send them back to whatever war torn hell they've escaped from and you don't agree they're refugees? And where would that be, we can not ascertain their true ages let alone where they have originated from, if they are true refugees why have they not sought asylum in France or any other safe country they have travelled through ???????????????? I presume its because they have family ties here. It's certainly got nothing to do with us being a soft touch or an easier to abuse benefit systems or a wider black market for labour as most of them choose to not come here.
|
|
|
Post by thevoid on Oct 19, 2016 15:20:09 GMT
Why not that was their last port of call before the poor little lambs rocked up here. Why are they France's "problem" any more than they're ours? I presume ultimately you want to send them back to whatever war torn hell they've escaped from and you don't agree they're refugees? Someone further up this thread said that they refused asylum in France- surely genuine asylum seekers would be happy to seek asylum in the first safe country, rather than picking and chosing?
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Oct 19, 2016 15:29:19 GMT
Why are they France's "problem" any more than they're ours? I presume ultimately you want to send them back to whatever war torn hell they've escaped from and you don't agree they're refugees? Someone further up this thread said that they refused asylum in France- surely genuine asylum seekers would be happy to seek asylum in the first safe country, rather than picking and chosing? Most go where they have family.
|
|
|
Post by imho on Oct 19, 2016 15:34:26 GMT
Technically none of the 'child' refugees are children anyway, from my understanding in the UK 14 is the cut off point of being a child - you then become a young person and the current 'crop' all stated an age above 14 (never mind what their real age actually is).
However I can't blame them from wanting to come here, often their home countries are in a shit state and they run the risk of being killed or tortured - that answers the question of why it's always young males (if you want to control a population you target the group that could cause you the most trouble, young males).
However by taking these people in we as a country run the risk of storing up trouble for the future, as these young men realise the UK isn't the land of milk and honey and they come to hate the country they tried so hard to get to (look at Germany, Belgium and Sweden) .
Personally I would prefer if we took direct action in their home countries to prevent the need for them wanting to leave - the only problem with that (well one of) is that it presumes we are always in the right/are the 'good guys'.
|
|
|
Post by rogerjonesisgod on Oct 19, 2016 16:03:22 GMT
Why are they France's "problem" any more than they're ours? I presume ultimately you want to send them back to whatever war torn hell they've escaped from and you don't agree they're refugees? Someone further up this thread said that they refused asylum in France- surely genuine asylum seekers would be happy to seek asylum in the first safe country, rather than picking and chosing? They also didn't register for asylum in Greece, Italy or any other safe European country that they travelled through which technically negates their position of asylum seeker and makes them economic migrants. A different status altogether. The EU / UN have been totally useless over this crisis. Cameron's plan to take refugees from camps in Lebanon, Jordan and Turkey is sound. It removes the need to undertake the journey through Europe, relieves the pressure on Greece and Italy, removes a cash cow from people trafficking organised crime gangs and you've more chance of finding personal paperwork proving backgrounds.
|
|