Cameron Shaming the Country

Where's the post where some of us got told off for mentioning the Red Flag?

It's back again - and a very stirring tune it is too.
As is Rule Britannia!

Just hum, everyone, if you don't like the words

They were probably puzzled as to why they were singing a Christmas song in the middle of September

RoseQ.

At least they knew the words.

I smiled at those in the pub with Corbyn celebrating his 'victory'. The obvious 'Red Flag' was being sung but half of them looked they were singing baa baa black sheep as they didn't know the words. .

But Brittania does rule, oh well happy long ago memories I suppose

It's a mystery POGS isn't it? Germany seems to call all the shots.

That's why I found it beautifully ironic to hear a (very dishy) German singing 'Rule Britannia' at the Last Night of the Proms

I have never understood it either POGS.
Just do your own things countries. What will happen?

Not so much a chicken brain. Best post so far on this subject. Funny enough I had just read an article on group think.

In the meantime much of Eastern Europe don't want to take any of the migrants, in spite of benefiting from free movement themselves. There appear to be enormous inconsistencies with very little joined up thinking.

The point about the US and the UK being the biggest donors has been mentioned before of course, roses, but always ignored by those determined to carry on insisting that we're 'not doing enough'.

It's a mystery POGS isn't it? Germany seems to call all the shots.

Chicken, you should have typed that bit in capitals, about the UK and the US being the best donors as some people do nothing but denigrate our efforts and of the US too.

Can anybody answer this.

Cameron has been derided time and time again by some for having a cat in hells chance of negotiating a new deal for the UK in Europe. He has been told the UK must abide by the decisions of all nations in the European Commission/Parliament and not seek unilateral deals for the UK.

Merkel, Hollande, Juncker et al have stated that the abiding principal of the European Union is the right to free movement and the countries in the Schengen Agreement will 'never' alter that decision.

If Germany can suddenly decide to unilaterally (at the moment!) halt the Schengen Agreement why can't other countries in the EU make similar decisions for their own country, sauce for the goose as they say.

Signed. And I agree, what is needed is a no fy zone. Turkey has been asking for this for ages. Meanwhile one of the reasons for the exodus from the camps is that the UN has cut funding. One of the reasons for that is the majority of EU countries have not sent the money promised. The UK and the US are the highest contributors.

I put this link on another thread, but just in case:

From the viewpoint of a young Syrian

act.thesyriacampaign.org/sign/we-want-to-go-home?source=fb&referring_akid=247.6835.cPl0ri

Interesting post, chickenbrain2009

I also hear (and have been hearing for some time now) reports from people who go into the refugee camps and some into Syria itself to take aid.
Yes, it is the old, sick, women, pregnant women and children who are suffering most. Some people seem to think that the fit young men are forging ahead to find a new life for those they left behind; maybe some are, but perhaps not in many cases.

A pragmatic, considered approach will be better in the long run than hasty decisions made with emotion not planning.

I agree with chicken brain but no surprise there it's how I have felt from the get go and said so.

Germany has reportedly stopped trains arriving from Austria today. It was being reported today that Merkel had told the Austrian PM that the Bavarian police will be in place on their border. There are now going to be border controls!

I have still not been given an answer to my question re the numbers. Germany is reported to be taking 800.000 refugees this year yet both Merkel and Hollande gave a joint news interview where Merkel said Germany will take 31.000 over the next two years.

Chickenbrain, in my opinion, one of the most informative and balanced posts on this thread so far.

excellent post Chicken, you say what a lot of people are thinking.

Well said Chickenbrain2009 I agree with you 100%.

I thought chickenbrain said some interesting and thought-provoking things. S/he obviously has information direct from the front line in a way that we, who only know what the media are feeding us, do not. No point in trying to score points or disagree about words like 'selfrighteous'. Deeds count. Lets try to get them right before emotional knee jerk reactions lead inadvertently into making things worse.

And saying - letting in the refugees would be a threat to our standard of living is valuing life equally ?

I don't see it as a "bandwagon" - it is an international crisis, and people are rightly concerned.

The use of the word "self-righteous" to describe those who express their concern and suggest solutions that you do not agree with is a bit suspect.

I do not think people are being self-righteous. On several posts I have said that taking in more refugees will bring problems, but that does not mean we should not do it. We need to find ways round these problems as we did at the end of WW2. Pumping money in, as happened with crises like Biafra, is not sufficient.

There is no moral high ground in encouraging illegal immigration. My son worked at the Syrian Camps. It is the poor, the old, the orphans, the sick and the women who get left behind with dwindling resources Meanwhile this trade, because that is what it is, lines the pockets of criminals and ISIS. If we want to reduce suffering we need to help finance countries like Jordan who are currently trying to maintain thousands of Syrians. These are fairly poor countries. Germany meanwhile has a declining population and cherry picks the most qualified refugees, before insisting other countries take the rest. Apparent largess which is not quite so altruistic, particularly when they are putting such a strain on receiving countries in the EU who are so much poorer. When making a decision about the best way to help we need to consider the overall picture, not just have a knee jerk reaction aimed at salving our conscience without thinking through the consequences. A large influx of refugees will have a destabilising effect on the receiving countries, not least on the climate for immigrants who are already here.THINK before engaging in group think and don't be naive. Before anyone gets too self righteous then consider the following links.

www.spiegel.de/international/europe/german-asylum-system-stretches-to-breaking-point-a-1052546.html

Or for a UK perspective www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-34172729

I get irritated by self righteous people who think they have a monopoly on morality. Acting in a moral way requires we think about the outcomes of our actions in a meaningful way and consider both short and long term best interests, not just in an individual way but for society at large. Sometimes it requires than we see further than the end of our noses and it is far braver to speak up when you may be saying uncomfortable truths that may not go with the flow in the media. If opinion polls are to be believed I am not alone in having reservations. Meanwhile we should all ensure our country continues to help financially, and consider who is gaining from an outpouring of indignation. Unfortunately children die every day all over the world. Being an ethical person means we value all life equally, not just when it is part of a bandwagon.

I admit to only reading this last page here so apologies if I repeat things already said.
If you go into many areas of the UK you will see houses boarded up, left empty and unloved etc. - it cannot be too difficult to find the owners of these properties and give them so long to get the house back into a liveable state or have it requisitioned and the work done by Councils or similar and rented out to families on the waiting list etc. Within a few years there would be less people living in very unsavoury conditions and less on the waiting lists. I also think that unscrupulous landlords who rent unsafe houses etc should also face some form of requisitioning. I saw on TV last week that there appears to be some sort of requirement for landlords to gain a certificate etc -- only caught a glimpse of Homes Under the Hammer and saw no details.

That doesn't sound good Jen. I know our council is having real problems with working out where to build and seem to want to just throw up another huge estate on the side of the nearest town which will basically join up with an already huge estate there. It's amazing how often they turn down affordable housing in the more expensive parts of the town though. The big problem always seem to be the lack of infrastructure and the promise of such things as schools which do not materialise.

My thoughts about actually reassessing the Green belt is that you could build new towns and new villages with all the infrastructure built first. It is almost as if it encourages "urban sprawl" currently.