The Barge

[Bosch]

As it says below "as of 10 August, 15,826 people have crossed the Channel in a small boat this year" i wonder how many didn't make it, will they ever stop these dangerous channel crossings?

​

Migrant boat sinks in Channel killing six people​

• • Published
    6 minutes a
  
  View attachment 88803

Six people have died after a boat carrying migrants sank in the English Channel.
A joint rescue operation by the British and French coastguards have rescued more than 50 others, authorities said.
A number of people were seen being brought off a lifeboat on stretchers in Dover. The extent of the other injuries is unclear.
The RNLI said a lifeboat crew was launched just before 04:00 BST.
A volunteer, who was on one of the rescue boats, told Reuters news agency migrants were using shoes to bale water out of the sinking boat.
Anne Thorel said there had been "too many" people on the boat.
The UK Home Office has been asked for more details about the incident while Home Secretary Suella Braverman is expected to chair a meeting this morning.
Another small boat also got into difficulty but all on board have been rescued, the UK Coastguard said.
As of 10 August, 15,826 people have crossed the Channel in a small boat this year.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-66484699

They are not going to stop attempting these crossings.
They will only increase as violence, political instability and climate change takes it toll.

The vast majority of refugees are taken in by neighbouring, developing countries.

Only an international effort by the developed world has a chance of even starting to solve this issues.

Asylum seekers are human beings and deserve respect, empathy to their conditions and fair treatment.

They do not deserve to be used as a political football to win votes or scare stories to sell news stories.

 

[Rodcx500z]

Does a country have to have a safe route by law, just asking

 

[Bosch]

Does a country have to have a safe route by law, just asking

I am not sure, but imagine been a member of the UN means you have to. Remember, the UN is a product of WW2 and there were huge issues of massive refugees migrating across Europe and Asia.
Also, the fact that many European countries (including the UK and the US) refused Jewish refugees before hostilities broke out, left a lasting legacy.

In fairness to the UK, the EU is no better on this issue either. It just let's people drown in the Mediterranean.

Again, these migrants will not stop coming no matter what individual governments try and do

 

[Old Fart At Play]

[
Those who wish to claim asylum should do so in the first safe country they arrive and typically those fleeing humanitarian disasters remain in the region in which they have been displaced. There are no visa routes to enable people to claim asylum in the UK from overseas

​

​

I don't know why you keep posting the same irrelevant list . It actually says in the thing you posted, that there are no visa routes for asylum seekers - I've included that bit of your post above.

It also says, this being an article written by the government, that asylum seekers should seek asylum in the first safe country they visit. This is absolutely not a requirement bunder international law, although the tories would have you believe that it is.

 

[pilgrimhudd]

 

[Clarence]

Does a country have to have a safe route by law, just asking

An asylum seeker has the right under international law to seek asylum wherever he or she chooses, so, while that doesn't imply a safe route, it would seem to imply a legal route. Of course there a plenty of rogue states who don't give a fig for international law. The UK being one of them.
Isn't that something to be proud of, being a rogue state!

I don't know why you keep posting the same irrelevant list . It actually says in the thing you posted, that there are no visa routes for asylum seekers - I've included that bit of your post above.

Would that it were irrelevant. Rather, it's a litany of shame.

It also says, this being an article written by the government, that asylum seekers should seek asylum in the first safe country they visit. This is absolutely not a requirement bunder international law, although the tories would have you believe that it is.

It's a complete lie. Not surprisingly. there is no such requirement. And for very good reasons.

Asylum seekers are human beings and deserve respect, empathy to their conditions and fair treatment.

They do not deserve to be used as a political football to win votes or scare stories to sell news stories.

Spot on. This is the point many here are missing. Or are they? I wonder if they're the same types who'd sit shtum on a crowded tube train while some old bird is getting beaten up by thugs, thinking "Nothing to do with me, squire, mustn't get involved".
We all know that these are human beings in distress, who we have a collective and a personal duty to assist in their time of need. All the arguments against, including the fact that there may be one or two truly dodgy foreigners among them who are trying to profit from all this, smack, to me, of moral cowardice. That's just my opinion, by the way.

 

[Old Fart At Play]

Nails it as always. If you haven't heard 'Call Jonathan Pie' it is well worth a listen! Cheers

 

[Old Fart At Play]

Would that it were irrelevant. Rather, it's a litany of shame.

I meant irrelevant to chippy's 'proof' that there are legal routes for asylum seekers, in that it doesn't prove any such thing

 

[Rodcx500z]

Safe and legal routes, We are second only to Sweden in the amount of legal refugees we have taken through safe legal route, so to say there are no legal safe routes is a blatant lie, we are an island of 244,820 square kilometres (94,530 sq miles, we are a genrouse country very tolerent and accomodating to those in need, there are no reasons to cross the channel in a blow up boat unless you have something to hide come on it's the busiest shipping lane in the world would you risk your kids lives or your own, i know i wouldn't under any circumstances

 

[Old Fart At Play]

Safe and legal routes, We are second only to Sweden in the amount of legal refugees we have taken through safe legal route, so to say there are no legal safe routes is a blatant lie, we are an island of 244,820 square kilometres (94,530 sq miles, we are a genrouse country very tolerent and accomodating to those in need, there are no reasons to cross the channel in a blow up boat unless you have something to hide come on it's the busiest shipping lane in the world would you risk your kids lives or your own, i know i wouldn't under any circumstances

There are two errors here.

First, as it says in the government's own paper (which chippy posted), there are no legal routes for asylum seekers. You are talking about refugees, not asylum seekers.

Second, we are not second only to UK in the number of refugees that we accommodate. The top countries as of 2022 look like this:

 

[Rodcx500z]

There are two errors here.

First, as it says in the government's own paper (which chippy posted), there are no legal routes for asylum seekers. You are talking about refugees, not asylum seekers.

Second, we are not second only to UK in the number of refugees that we accommodate. The top countries as of 2022 look like this:

View attachment 88808

There are two errors here.

First, as it says in the government's own paper (which chippy posted), there are no legal routes for asylum seekers. You are talking about refugees, not asylum seekers.

Second, we are not second only to UK in the number of refugees that we accommodate. The top countries as of 2022 look like this:

View attachment 88808

Why do you never answer the questions, would you risk your kids lives and your own when there are safe routes for genuine people

 

[Old Fart At Play]

Why do you never answer the questions, would you risk your kids lives and your own when there are safe routes for genuine people

What a strange post.

It may be worth asking yourself why people do indeed take the enormous risk of crossing the channel in small boats. What desperation drives them to do that?

There are no safe, legal routes for asylum seekers.

 

[MrJay83]

It may be worth asking yourself why people do indeed take the enormous risk of crossing the channel in small boats. What desperation drives them to do that?

The promise of a better life. It seems to be an ever increasing amount of these guys are making the journey for economic reasons and not fleeing war, persecution, etc. Unfortunately, Western & Northern Europe can't host even a fraction of the people coming.

 

[Chippy_Tea]

It also says, this being an article written by the government, that asylum seekers should seek asylum in the first safe country they visit. This is absolutely not a requirement bunder international law, although the tories would have you believe that it is.

If you had listened to the phone in i linked to you would have heard the general public asking why these desperate people pass through safe countries (not just the first) before boarding a dangerous boat and risking their lives to come here, they understood that many have family here and also want to come because they can speak English but how many dont have family here or cannot speak the language and yet still take the risk when they could stay in a safe country (again not the first they come to) as has been said in the thread we have all seen the interviews where they have admitted they want to come here because they think they will have a better life in the UK surely they are getting this information from those that are taking their money and putting them on the small boats.

​

 

[Chippy_Tea]

Quit ECHR to solve the migrant crisis -

'Migrants keep coming because they get rewarded!' The UK needs to copy Australia says David Kurten (11-8-2023)​

'They are doing it because they get rewarded!' Leader of the Heritage Party, David Kurten, says the UK needs to mirror the Australian system of preventing illegal migrants from entering the country, as a way of dealing with the small boats crisis.

 

[Clarence]

'Migrants keep coming because they get rewarded!' The UK needs to copy Australia says David Kurten​

'They are doing it because they get rewarded!' Leader of the Heritage Party, David Kurten, says the UK needs to mirror the Australian system of preventing illegal migrants from entering the country, as a way of dealing with the small boats crisis.

Thought as much. Here's all you need to know about Kurten and the Heritage Party.
Not the sort of party I'm likely to be invited to.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heritage_Party_(UK)https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Kurten
Isn't Kurten an anagram of Goebbels? At least they seem to be singing from the same song-book.

 

[Rodcx500z]

What a strange post.

It may be worth asking yourself why people do indeed take the enormous risk of crossing the channel in small boats. What desperation drives them to do that?

There are no safe, legal routes for asylum seekers.

There are safe routes for genuine people

 

[Chippy_Tea]

Thought as much. Here's all you need to know about Kurten and the Heritage Party.
Not the sort of party I'm likely to be invited to.

In case you stopped watching he wasn't the only one giving their opinion -

"There is no political will to end high levels of migration"

"Legal levels of migration have risen phenomenally"

 

[Chippy_Tea]

Fourteen days across the Atlantic, perched on a ship’s rudder​

Four Nigerian stowaways set out for Europe on the rudder of a tanker. They had no idea they were bound for Brazil, and a two-week ocean voyage that would nearly kill them.

A little after midnight on 27 June, Roman Ebimene Friday gathered up the food he had been collecting for a few months and set out in the dark for the large commercial port in the city of Lagos, Nigeria. Earlier that day, Friday had spotted a 620-foot (190m) tanker docked at the port and decided that it would be the ship to deliver him to Europe.
Friday was aiming for the tanker's rudder - the only accessible point on its massive hull for a person who isn't supposed to be aboard. There was no way to bridge the gap from the dock to the rudder, other than convince a fisherman to ferry him across. "He was a holy man, that fisherman," Friday recalled. "He did not ask for money. He could see that I wanted to leave."
The fisherman sidled up to the rudder and Friday, 35, pulled himself up, hauling his food bag behind him on a rope. As he steadied himself he saw, to his surprise, three faces in the dark. He was the last of four men with the same idea. "I was scared, at first," Friday said. "But they were black Africans, my brothers."
Fearful of being caught, the four men perched silently on the rudder for the next 15 hours. At 5pm, they felt the ship's giant engines shudder to life. Over the din, they shouted a few words. They were all aiming for Europe. They expected to be shipmates for as long as a week.
The tanker, called the Ken Wave, pushed out from the port and headed to sea - the beginning of a perilous two-week ocean voyage that would bring the stowaways close to death.

Day one​

As Lagos receded behind them, the men tried and failed to find comfortable positions on the rudder, which moved constantly as it steered the ship. There was precious little space to stand, and the only place to lie was in one of two small nets strung precariously over the water, by previous stowaways, Friday assumed.
It can be hard to understand, from the outside, what drives a person to risk their life on a rudder or a rickety boat across the Mediterranean. But the decision comes easy when you have already lost hope, Friday said.
"In Nigeria there are no jobs, no money and no way for me to feed my younger brothers and my mother," he said. "I am the first born son and my father died 20 years ago, so I should take care of my family, but I cannot."
Instead he had spent three years living on and off the street in Lagos, trying to find work. Each day in Nigeria was a gauntlet of "crime and sin," he said. "People fighting, killing each other, terrorists attacking, kidnappers. I want a brighter future than that."

Perched next to Friday on the rudder of the tanker was Thankgod Opemipo Matthew Yeye, a Pentecostal minister, businessman and father of two whose peanut and palm oil farm had washed away in the devastating floods that hit Nigeria last year. There had been no fallback or insurance to cover the loss.
"My business was destroyed and my family became homeless. And that was the genesis of my decision to leave," he said.
Yeye's decision became final after the recent presidential election, which was marred by anomalies and allegations of vote rigging. "The election had been our hope," he said. "But we know Nigeria well, we know the system is corrupt." So, without telling his family, he left his sister's home at night and set out for the port, where he knew the Ken Wave was waiting to depart.
Nigeria has seen an exodus of people like Yeye and Friday in recent years, via regular and irregular routes, driven by recessions and record unemployment levels. Many travel across the Sahara and the Mediterranean, where at least 1,200 Nigerians have died already this year, according to the UN.

Full article - Fourteen days across the Atlantic, perched on a ship’s rudder

 

[Brew_DD2]

I only unblocked you 2 days ago but, while up to your own goading ways i will block you for good

absolutely no goading in my response. You asked someone to answer a question that contained a false premise, and my post was to point out the futility of that.

There are safe routes for only those we have chosen. If you happen to come from one of the other 205 countries in the world and you want to claim asylum in The UK, then arriving in the UK (by any means) is the only way to claim asylum.