• 🇬🇧󠁿 🇸🇪 🇿🇦 🇮🇪 🇬🇭 🇩🇪 🇪🇺
    European & African
    Drug Discussion

    Welcome Guest!
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
  • EADD Moderators: Shambles

Will i see a decent government before i die?

Shambles said:


So-called asylum hotel protestors show their true face :|
Click to expand...

A significant percentage of the men leading this protest under the guise of 'save our women and children' because ONE guy from Eritrea committed a sexual assault (for which crime he of course should be immediately deported), have turned out to have domestic abuse and sexual harassment charges in their records.

I wonder why they feel the need to be SO demonstratively vocal about a single particular sex offender from another country.
Hmmmm.... 🤔
 
The SLOP aren’t a miracle cure. They’ll slow the bleeding, maybe, but don’t expect a golden age. At best, you’ll get slightly less corruption and a bit more competence. That might already feel “decent” compared to the last circus.
 
TheUltimateFixx said:
A significant percentage of the men leading this protest under the guise of 'save our women and children' because ONE guy from Eritrea committed a sexual assault (for which crime he of course should be immediately deported), have turned out to have domestic abuse and sexual harassment charges in their records.

I wonder why they feel the need to be SO demonstratively vocal about a single particular sex offender from another country.
Hmmmm.... 🤔
Click to expand...
OK I got the country wrong. The man was Ethiopian, not Eritrean.

But police data made available under the freedom of information act says that 41% of the men arrested for 'protesting' aka rioting had previous convictions for sexual and domestic violence, so what are you hahaha-ing about.
@LoginNotSecure
 
TheUltimateFixx said:
OK I got the country wrong. The man was Ethiopian, not Eritrean.

But police data made available under the freedom of information act says that 41% of the men arrested for 'protesting' aka rioting had previous convictions for sexual and domestic violence, so what are you hahaha-ing about.
@LoginNotSecure
Click to expand...

People who get arrested have usually committed other crimes in the past. What's the % when you include people who didn't get arrested? Obviously you can't really know, because they didn't get arrested so no-one checked.

Even then, 41% doesn't pass the smell test. Surely it isn't 41%?

It's not just one guy who committed a sex crime either. You can break down crimes committed on British soil by the nationalities of their perpetrators. Some nationalities like your Afghans and Albanians commit crime at an absurdly high rate compared to the locals. Obviously you can't judge individual people from those countries based upon those stats, but I think it's reasonable to be significantly more cautious with regards to who we allow in from those countries.
 
TheUltimateFixx said:
We're not being 'flooded' ffs. There's several European countries that take in significantly greater numbers than we do, France for one, and last time I looked French culture wasn't being 'erased'.

Besides the economy relies on immigration. Right now we have staffing shortages across the board in the agricultural sector, building, healthcare and the retail industry, since large numbers of European workers left because they felt no longer welcome post-Brexit.
Click to expand...
capitalist system exploiting immigrants and causing other issues does not mean immigrants are to blame for these problems.
 
What does "blaming immigrants" even mean? Does wanting lower immigration mean that I am "blaming immigrants"? I obviously know that immigrants themselves are not setting immigration policy.

It could be argued that some immigrants are doing a bit of exploiting themselves, too
 
If immigration lowers salaries, it is largely consequence of extortion (both legal and illegal), inequality and lack of proper social services that force immigrants to do stuff for shit salary. It is at least partly deliberately manufactured problem to both get cheap labor AND get population to blame for issues that were never born from immigrants themselves.

One could argument that globalism is to blame also as obviously people who make one dollar a hour where they have born in third world country, can lower salaries in first world countries a bit, even if required income to survive is also higher, but even then, we should not forget that third world countries are still victims of all kind of "imperialism analog practices" done by first world countries, of which they greatly benefit, and thus, it is only fair to give other people chance to benefit also of the harm first world countries do to those countries.
 
GulpingBatteryLiquid said:
People who get arrested have usually committed other crimes in the past. What's the % when you include people who didn't get arrested? Obviously you can't really know, because they didn't get arrested so no-one checked.

Even then, 41% doesn't pass the smell test. Surely it isn't 41%?

It's not just one guy who committed a sex crime either. You can break down crimes committed on British soil by the nationalities of their perpetrators. Some nationalities like your Afghans and Albanians commit crime at an absurdly high rate compared to the locals. Obviously you can't judge individual people from those countries based upon those stats, but I think it's reasonable to be significantly more cautious with regards to who we allow in from those countries.
Click to expand...
I'm saying A) process cases as they come in, instead of letting a vast backlog develop, which was an intentional policy to stoke resentment among a certain section of the electorate because showing the artificially engineered 'pile-ups' of 'massive numbers' guarantees conservative votes, PLUS B) immediately deport anyone identifiable as having been a criminal in his home country (where records are available), or who commits any crime on arrival.

Or in short, acceptance or refusal has to be decided on a rigorous case-by-case basis. That's the only way that is both humane and logical.
Categorical compassion for refugees, categorical rejection of criminal elements.
 
TheUltimateFixx said:
B) immediately deport anyone identifiable as having been a criminal in his home country (where records are available), or who commits any crime on arrival.
Click to expand...

I feel the need to drop in the caveat that some non-democratic nations are notorious for arresting and indeed convicting people on spurious charges when in truth, it's to get rid of political opponents.

Alexei Anatolyevich Navalny is an example we know of, but mostly we don't know. In Russia now, saying ANYTHING negative about the government is a crime but I don't think it's unique to that nation.

In fact, finding people guilty in absentia is not uncommon in some nations and if it means your system will automatically get them sent back - that's a lever to be used.

But I freely admit that for criminals, claiming political asylum to avoid genuine criminal convictions is also a lever to be used.
 
TheUltimateFixx said:
A significant percentage of the men leading this protest under the guise of 'save our women and children' because ONE guy from Eritrea committed a sexual assault (for which crime he of course should be immediately deported), have turned out to have domestic abuse and sexual harassment charges in their records.

I wonder why they feel the need to be SO demonstratively vocal about a single particular sex offender from another country.
Hmmmm.... 🤔
Click to expand...
 
GulpingBatteryLiquid said:
What does "blaming immigrants" even mean?
Click to expand...
It generally means blaming immigrants for the unfortunate circumstances of your own life. Immigrants are NOT responsible for the fact you can't find a job or get an affordable place to live or aren't able to access healthcare.

The HUGE wealth inequality that creates artificial scarcity of resources is what does that.

Nobody likes to blame the people responsible sucking ALL of us dry, because for one it's easier to hate what you perceive as 'foreign' and different to you, and for another too many people secretly aspire to one day BE the filthy rich bastard who does all the exploiting.

Someone somewhere summed it up rather well with this symbolic scenario :

"A rich man sits at a table opposite a white and a black worker. The rich man is hoarding a plate piled high with sandwiches. There is a single sandwich placed between the two workers on the table. The rich man looks at the white worker, then points to the black worker and says : HE WANTS YOUR SANDWICH."

So instead of uniting against our common enemy, we stay divided and treat EACH OTHER as the enemy. And this is just how the owner class wants it, because it guarantees them complete control.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, yeah, Grauniad, but they do tend to be acccurate on some issues.

www.theguardian.com

UK public has paid £200bn to shareholders of key industries since privatisation

Analysis reveals ‘privatisation premium’ of £250 per household per year paid to owners of water, rail, bus, energy and mail services since 2010
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com

The research found that between 1981 and 1996 the rush to privatise key industries was faster and more radical in the UK than in almost any other advanced economy. It calculated that during this period the UK shed gross public wealth at a rate of 7.4% of national income per year for 15 years. Among rich world economies, the only countries to have shed gross public wealth faster are Russia, Hungary and the Czech Republic in the 1990s, during the peak of their “shock therapy” moves from communism to capitalism.
Click to expand...

Fucking hell. More stability in Bulgaria, Romania, the former Yugoslavia, and so on. Yet we were led to believe that being the world's economic centre would trickle down and make us 'great' again.
 
Last edited:
^^^will be the NHS after the next election, alongside decimation of workers rights and conditions, more severe benefit cuts, the right to torture being reinstated, etc etc. (A tad alarmist perhaps and based on a much further right of centre party getting in, which feels inevitable at this point although there's a way to go yet)
 
So The Royal Family have been roped in to schmooze Trump and give him some more opportunities for looking great on TV and photographs, and this will also make Trump the first president to receive 2 state visits.

It'll probably go well until Starmer and co get involved, as by all accounts the Trumps were on their best behaviour with the Royals and all of their staff, on their previous visit, as neither side wanted to put a foot wrong.

According to the BBC it's all in aid of trying to sweet talk Trump into scrapping tariffs on British steel and aluminium, and also aiming to seal the deal on a UK partnership with Silicon valley for AI and quantum computing.

Maybe this will be one thing Starmer and co won't fuck up and get completely wrong!?

Although my confidence in this government having a single clue about anything is about minus 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 %
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top