Immigration and migrants

Can I ask Cossy what part of the country do you live?

Primrose53

It is virtue signalling. Look how great I am, I have compassion, I am not nasty or bigoted or ignorant like you lot! That’s how it sounds.

I could write a book about several years I spent in the early 70s working with Ugandan Asians who were thrown out by Idi Amin and arrived with a small suitcase and a few quid. Now I’m getting accused of having no compassion! I loved working with them and presumably they thought I was OK because they invited me to weddings and other family occasions and some still keep in touch.

They came here legally as most had British passports and they worked extremely hard, often 7 days a week, in order to provide for their families. Some of them are now the wealthiest businesspeople in the country.

There is a massive difference between people like them getting kicked out with just a few days notice and freeloading, mainly fit young men, who see us as the land of milk and honey. They don’t want to work because they know our benefit system will pay them not to. They could be anybody and we can’t do a thing about it.

I think your comments about me are very unfair and quite rude, but I accept this is the way you feel.

I have not, not never would, personally accuse you of bigotry or called out anyone else and targeted them personally.

The tone of some posts though does smack of bigotry.

That’s how they sound to me, just as my original post to you sounds like I’m “bigging” myself up, which I can assure you I’m not.

I’m not talking only about the Clapham attacker, but of the growing trend to be baptised purely in order to be granted asylum. It is a disgraceful practice and makes a mockery of the Christian religion.

Good question Elless.

What it boils down to is that if you present reason and facts you are virtue signalling. However if you comment on the basis of rumour, biased reporting and supposition you have seen the light Cossy. There are plenty of us with you, Virtue Signallers United if that is how others wish to portray it.

Rise above it Cossy: the other thread you allude to has, as does often happen when there is a long lasting thread, to repetition,

and sometimes deliberately provocative remarks, which are designed to throw off topic by personalising matters.

A lot of people are glad you have started this thread, as I've said several times, best to try and stay on topic.

Elless

Can I ask Cossy what part of the country do you live?

Yes of course, I live in Essex, about 37 miles from London. In a large seaside town, so we have more than our fair share of homeless, addicts, some asylum seekers, many nationalities. My own children’s primary school has 30+ languages and was a school governor there for many years. I worked as a front facing civil servant from 2009 to 2022 and for many of these years was front facing in several different job centres across Essex and for over four years was attached to the local authority working with vulnerable groups, including asylum seekers and care leavers, so I do speak from some position of knowledge.

Germanshepherdsmum

I’m not talking only about the Clapham attacker, but of the growing trend to be baptised purely in order to be granted asylum. It is a disgraceful practice and makes a mockery of the Christian religion.

Apparently a group of Christian clerics were asked to attend a meeting by government, to try and address this crazy practise.
In their eagerness to be of use to these migrants and get brownie points with so many baptisms they have made a mockery of their religion and themselves.Useful idiots I think the term is.

GSM, stop on as usual.

Germanshepherdsmum

I’m not talking only about the Clapham attacker, but of the growing trend to be baptised purely in order to be granted asylum. It is a disgraceful practice and makes a mockery of the Christian religion.

I absolutely agree. Just as I agree that SOME human rights lawyers might give somewhat contentious advice.

What I don’t do is tar all asylum seekers (or lawyers) with the same brush.

I’m afraid Cossy’s opening post came across as a lecture or a sermon. It’s her manner of putting forward her view, and putting down those who disagree, which has resulted in the accusations of virtue signalling. There was no need to start this thread. It was naive to believe that it would only attract comments from like-minded people saying nice things. We are all entitled to our opinions and to put them forward within guidelines.

Casdon

What it boils down to is that if you present reason and facts you are virtue signalling. However if you comment on the basis of rumour, biased reporting and supposition you have seen the light Cossy. There are plenty of us with you, Virtue Signallers United if that is how others wish to portray it.

A poor comment from you, am surprised.
Facts and stats, nobody is denying, but wanting it to stop as the numbers will keep on growing as the weeks months and years go by is reasonable.
It’s a growing problem throughout Europe, just that a few countries are more efficient in deporting and refusing asylum.
The present government have been inept in this situation.

Germanshepherdsmum

I’m afraid Cossy’s opening post came across as a lecture or a sermon. It’s her manner of putting forward her view, and putting down those who disagree, which has resulted in the accusations of virtue signalling. There was no need to start this thread. It was naive to believe that it would only attract comments from like-minded people saying nice things. We are all entitled to our opinions and to put them forward within guidelines.

That’s it in a nutshell.
There’s a tendency by posters to sometimes regard a thread that they start as a personal thing, when it really isn’t.

I tar all lawyers acting for asylum seekers with the same brush. And remember they are paid by the taxpayer to make up fairy stories and advise their clients to get baptised. They are laughing all the way to the bank. Despicable people.

I've worked with refugees and found it a very positive experience. Many had terribly sad stories, missed their homeland and way of life. None of them were responsible for the situation they found themselves in that compelled them to leave but humans are survivors. I think what I find upsetting in some posts is the de-humanising of refugees, that inability to try to understand what it must be like to be in their shoes, the willingness to see people as criminals or out to "milk" our benefit system. No doubt someone will see my post as "naive" or "virtue signalling" or that I am "saintly". I'm none of those things but I do have experience which has informed my views.

NotSpaghetti

I may be wrong but I saw this thread, Namsnanny as a way to balance the rather unpleasant thread loosely on the same subject.

I think Cossy was trying to start with a clean slate and encourage informed chat/debate rather than the hostility that permeates the other thread. Sorry if I have misinterpreted this.

Unfortunately it seems to have started to spill over here too.

I was grateful for a new place to talk.

Just saying.

Dont be sorry NotSpaghetti you're just voicing your oponion👍
I dont agree though🤣

The op was authoritarian, finger wagging, know all-ish, holier-than-thou and virtue signalling (shall I go on?😄)

How does she know I havent already researched the situation and come up with a more informed opinion than hers?

No, she was using gn as a lectern at the pulpit (qualifier, imo).

Read some facts at swvg-refugees.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/Claiming-Asylum-in-the-UK-1.pdf

If you came in a nasty little boat (assuming it didn't sink on the way and drown you) you would undergo a compulsory asylum interview, where are asked to fully explain how you have been persecuted in your home country and why you are afraid to return and any evidence they you have will need to be presented.

The interpreters available may not speak in the same dialect as you, you may be extremely frightened and from a country where the death penalty is often applied. Fear of those in authority may have instilled a reluctance to be open meaning that this information. Evidence is rarely clear-cut as being caught in your home country with the “wrong set of papers” may also result in death or imprisonment.

To further exacerbate the stress, you may very likely have undergone an extremely long journey in very difficult conditions, often in the back of a lorry having fled from violence and torture, witnessed family or friends being murdered.

Once the interview has been completed, you would wait for a decision. This may be months but can also be years. Meanwhile, you would be housed in accommodation provided by the Home Office. This will not be luxurious!!

If you are judged destitute and entitled to accommodation, you will also receive a small living allowance in cash or vouchers of £37.75 per week (or £5.40) a day. Don't blue it all on having three meals a day for the first day-and-a-half.

Failure to report on a regular basis to one of 15 centres across the UK will result in your claim being dismissed. As an asylum seeker you are not allowed to work, drive, rent housing or hold a bank account.

Perhaps, if you don’t want to undergo all that, don’t come here.

Report from the
Refugee Council to see other POV than the negative

www.refugeecouncil.org.uk/information/refugee-asylum-facts/the-truth-about-asylum/

Oreo

Casdon

What it boils down to is that if you present reason and facts you are virtue signalling. However if you comment on the basis of rumour, biased reporting and supposition you have seen the light Cossy. There are plenty of us with you, Virtue Signallers United if that is how others wish to portray it.

A poor comment from you, am surprised.
Facts and stats, nobody is denying, but wanting it to stop as the numbers will keep on growing as the weeks months and years go by is reasonable.
It’s a growing problem throughout Europe, just that a few countries are more efficient in deporting and refusing asylum.
The present government have been inept in this situation.

People are denying the facts though Oreo. For example, the percentage of people who arrive on boats who have a legitimate asylum claim, the distribution of asylum seekers across the whole of the UK, the reported numbers being exacerbated by the processing delays encouraged by the government - I could go on. If we don’t all agree with the received wisdom of the loud shouters and dare to point out their arguments are not evidence based, we are classed as virtue signallers.

Germanshepherdsmum

I’m afraid Cossy’s opening post came across as a lecture or a sermon. It’s her manner of putting forward her view, and putting down those who disagree, which has resulted in the accusations of virtue signalling. There was no need to start this thread. It was naive to believe that it would only attract comments from like-minded people saying nice things. We are all entitled to our opinions and to put them forward within guidelines.

I think that’s a little unfair GSM, it’s a subject which many of us feel very strongly about and I think you’ve seen enough of my posts to know me slightly better than “putting down those who disagree”. I’ve no issue whatsoever with people with different experiences and different opinions and views.

What I completely object to though, is when posters simply repeat what they’ve read or heard third hand and claim that they are factual.

I respect and celebrate the fact that we live in a country where we are all free and entitled express our own views, beliefs and opinions. However views and opinions and beliefs are not facts are they?

Sorry you feel “there was no need to start this thread”, there’s no need to start any thread nor to read or comment.

I was making a point I believed (& still believe) is valid and it’s entirely up to other GNs as to whether they agree or disagree. I’m don’t lead such a sad life that I need to have total strangers saying “nice things”. I totally accept we are made up from a very diverse cohort of people, some will agree and some will not. I respect this, provided their posts don’t smack of labelling any one group as “bad”.

foxie48

I've worked with refugees and found it a very positive experience. Many had terribly sad stories, missed their homeland and way of life. None of them were responsible for the situation they found themselves in that compelled them to leave but humans are survivors. I think what I find upsetting in some posts is the de-humanising of refugees, that inability to try to understand what it must be like to be in their shoes, the willingness to see people as criminals or out to "milk" our benefit system. No doubt someone will see my post as "naive" or "virtue signalling" or that I am "saintly". I'm none of those things but I do have experience which has informed my views.

Am sure that working with individuals who are refugees gives an insight into their past, presuming it’s an honest tale.For some it will be, for others not so much.
Being filled with the milk of human kindness and wishing all who jump on boats to get here could stay just isn’t reasonable tho.Not saying that you want that but some do.
I would have preferred the money spent on the Rwanda project to be spent on training lots of immigration officers to deal with applications within the HO.Quick processing of claims and followed by faster deportations.

Oreo

Legal migration is one thing and illegal migration is another.
Stop mixing them up.
Calling other points of view other than your own ignorance and bigotry shows how intransigent you are.

Yet it’s ok to use “virtue signaling” as a slander to other posters?

Only one side is allowed to ‘name call’?

More facts.
Decisions are made by Civil Servants in the Home Office or by immigration judges. The decision will be one of the following:
Leave to Remain - legal permission to stay in the UK ,normally for five years.
Limited leave to remain - normally for 2.5 years with reapplication every 2.5 years up to 10 years in total. Fees for application are currently £601 per individual with a £200 health levy each time. There is no access to legal aid
and penalties are imposed for even minor law infringements, for example, detention or removal.

Germanshepherdsmum

I tar all lawyers acting for asylum seekers with the same brush. And remember they are paid by the taxpayer to make up fairy stories and advise their clients to get baptised. They are laughing all the way to the bank. Despicable people.

What about the “genuine” asylum seekers, and the “honest” human rights lawyers? No one is denying that not everyone who comes across here is a genuine asylum seeker, not than there are some “questionable” lawyers, but surely even you can see that sometimes there is a need for an asylum seeker to honestly appeal? I think we all know the Home Office are overstretched and don’t always get it right?