Migrants crossing the Channel

KUMB's 24-hour rolling news channel. The Forum in which to discuss non sport-related news and current affairs, including politics.

Moderators: Gnome, last.caress, Wilko1304, Rio, bristolhammerfc, the pink palermo, chalks

Post Reply
Online
User avatar
delbert
Posts: 27177
Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2003 11:27 pm
Location: Barking, home of the slowly meandering Prius
Has liked: 699 likes
Total likes: 697 likes

Re: Migrants crossing the Channel

Post by delbert »

A woman scorned, nothing more.......
User avatar
Mullhull
Posts: 1150
Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2015 3:10 am
Has liked: 346 likes
Total likes: 274 likes

Re: Migrants crossing the Channel

Post by Mullhull »

Monkeybubbles wrote: Mon Mar 13, 2023 12:44 pm
~ The Albi's made a deal with the Colombian cartels and imported cocaine direct into the UK, excluding the middlemen. In this way they were able to offer a much cheaper product with much higher quality. That's partly the reason that there are so many coked up dick heads at football now.

~ Subsequently, the Albanians have pretty much taken control of the UK drug market, which is worth £5 billion. They're also responsible for maybe 70% of prostitution, arms smuggling and, crucially, people trafficking. They're the biggest organised crime group in the UK, maybe third or fourth in the world.

~ They are ****ing ruthless.

~ It would seem that seem that some of the Albi's trying to reach the UK are coming willingly as they may already have been recruited, or are enticed by a better life(there's a low level offshoot gang known as the Hellbainianz that make rap videos with the usual cash, girls, cars, guns as a recruiting tool), but many are being coerced into coming by the mafia. If they return, bad things will happen to them and their families.


It's all ****ed, but it's not as simple as "send them all back, there's no war in Albania".
The port of Antwerp in Belgium (largest in the EU) are having serious issues with imported drugs from South America. Literally everything you've said about building relations with Cartels etc is all true.

Antwerp being the main port the narcotics come into and the Port Authorities in Antwerp being pretty much powerless to stop it.

I wasn't sure about it coming into UK ports the same way but it's 100% coming that way into mainland Europe.

There is a reason why Patel struck that deal with the Albanian Government.
User avatar
Samba
Posts: 21811
Joined: Mon Apr 03, 2017 3:36 pm
Location: David Sullivan's least favourite fluffer.
Has liked: 2484 likes
Total likes: 895 likes

Re: Migrants crossing the Channel

Post by Samba »

Monkeybubbles wrote: Mon Mar 13, 2023 12:44 pm ~ The subsequent spread of the Albanian Mafia has mostly been down to their willingness to buddy up with other crime rings, notably the Italian mafia, the Turks and the Colombians. They also are very good at setting up mutually beneficial trade deals.
~ Before the rise of the Albanians, most of the cocaine in the UK came from South America via mainland Europe, and had various margins applied by drug gangs (Russian, mostly) that operated in Europe. The drugs were usually cut with other cheaper substances by the same gangs.
~ The Albi's made a deal with the Colombian cartels and imported cocaine direct into the UK, excluding the middlemen. In this way they were able to offer a much cheaper product with much higher quality. That's partly the reason that there are so many coked up dick heads at football now.
~ Subsequently, the Albanians have pretty much taken control of the UK drug market, which is worth £5 billion. They're also responsible for maybe 70% of prostitution, arms smuggling and, crucially, people trafficking. They're the biggest organised crime group in the UK, maybe third or fourth in the world.
~ They are ****ing ruthless.
~ It would seem that seem that some of the Albi's trying to reach the UK are coming willingly as they may already have been recruited, or are enticed by a better life(there's a low level offshoot gang known as the Hellbainianz that make rap videos with the usual cash, girls, cars, guns as a recruiting tool), but many are being coerced into coming by the mafia. If they return, bad things will happen to them and their families.
You're really not selling the idea of them to me, Monkeyb..
User avatar
ironsonthebrain
Posts: 2517
Joined: Mon May 09, 2011 8:54 am
Has liked: 644 likes
Total likes: 119 likes

Re: Migrants crossing the Channel

Post by ironsonthebrain »

MD_HM wrote: Mon Mar 13, 2023 10:11 am Posted this on the BBC thread in relation to the Lineker nonsense but as that's about to end thought it's better served here:

In January to September 2022, half of small boat arrivals were from just these two nationalities - Albanians (35%) and Afghans (15%), as shown in Figure 4. In the latest quarter alone (July to September 2022), 45% of small boat arrivals were Albanian (9,076), and there were days where as many as 80% of arrivals were Albanian.

This issue isn't about Syrian or Ukrainian refugees... Don't let the politics blind you
Afghans.
Wouldn't they be the people we left to their own fate after promising to 'protect ' them from the Taliban?
So we don't owe Afghans fleeing persecution anything then?
User avatar
Denbighammer
Posts: 12871
Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2007 6:53 pm
Location: Dodging, Dipping, Diving, Ducking and Dodging.
Has liked: 697 likes
Total likes: 431 likes

Re: Migrants crossing the Channel

Post by Denbighammer »

Samba wrote: Tue Mar 14, 2023 4:38 am You're really not selling the idea of them to me, Monkeyb..
In all seriousness, how many if the thousands of blokes who turn up here every year from Albania are footsoldiers for these gangs? Which is probably why they risk their lives in small boats rather than taking official routes.
YorksHammer
Posts: 9589
Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2016 4:03 pm
Has liked: 382 likes
Total likes: 1412 likes

Re: Migrants crossing the Channel

Post by YorksHammer »

How many of then are trying to get away from the gangs they've been forced into working for from a young age and so can't go through the legal routes, though?

Not saying it's exclusive, but the idea that there's a significant number being sent here as some kind of Albanian gang takeover seems a little bit farfetched to me.
User avatar
Monkeybubbles
Posts: 13801
Joined: Sun Feb 02, 2014 11:00 am
Location: Rumble, Brighton, Tonight.
Has liked: 485 likes
Total likes: 1955 likes

Re: Migrants crossing the Channel

Post by Monkeybubbles »

Denbighammer wrote: Tue Mar 14, 2023 8:19 am
In all seriousness, how many if the thousands of blokes who turn up here every year from Albania are footsoldiers for these gangs? Which is probably why they risk their lives in small boats rather than taking official routes.
IMO a more pertinent question might be: How many are coming willingly and how many are trafficked under duress?

You're probably aware of the story about teenage asylum seekers going missing from hotels in Brighton. From what I understand, many of those (don't ask what proportion, I haven't a clue) are coerced into coming here by the criminal organisation. They're then abducted and put to work. If they don't come, they and their families may be harmed. If they are returned, the same might happen.

What do we do with them? And how do we work out who's here because they want to be, and who's here because they have to be?
User avatar
Francoisvander or else
Posts: 4119
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2005 8:33 pm
Location: Certainly not in a JJB store
Has liked: 6 likes
Total likes: 98 likes

Re: Migrants crossing the Channel

Post by Francoisvander or else »

Monkeybubbles wrote: Tue Mar 14, 2023 9:02 am IMO a more pertinent question might be: How many are coming willingly and how many are trafficked under duress?

You're probably aware of the story about teenage asylum seekers going missing from hotels in Brighton. From what I understand, many of those (don't ask what proportion, I haven't a clue) are coerced into coming here by the criminal organisation. They're then abducted and put to work. If they don't come, they and their families may be harmed. If they are returned, the same might happen.

What do we do with them? And how do we work out who's here because they want to be, and who's here because they have to be?
Put them to work in the fields for 10 hours a day, give them an opportunity to prove they are grafters and have a work ethic that will benefit the country and economy. Surely that’s more beneficial than leaving them dossing around in hotels and beds sits all day.
Online
User avatar
delbert
Posts: 27177
Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2003 11:27 pm
Location: Barking, home of the slowly meandering Prius
Has liked: 699 likes
Total likes: 697 likes

Re: Migrants crossing the Channel

Post by delbert »

ironsonthebrain wrote: Tue Mar 14, 2023 8:17 am Afghans.
Wouldn't they be the people we left to their own fate after promising to 'protect ' them from the Taliban?
So we don't owe Afghans fleeing persecution anything then?
All of them?

As for the Albanians, send them back. The only reason they're coming here is because we're letting them in whilst no other ****er is, by accepting them we're perpetuating the problem......
User avatar
bubbles1966
Posts: 66970
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2007 10:01 pm
Location: I'm holding onto nothing, and trying to forget the rest
Has liked: 2437 likes
Total likes: 4292 likes

Re: Migrants crossing the Channel

Post by bubbles1966 »

Monkeybubbles wrote: Tue Mar 14, 2023 9:02 am IMO a more pertinent question might be: How many are coming willingly and how many are trafficked under duress?
Is being the victim of a crime the same as being a refugee?

My understanding has always been that refugees were essentially people that were fleeing invasions, domestic civil wars or who were being persecuted or at risk of serious harm at the hands of the state in their own country. That was the spirit behind the rules.

It isn't for sorting out acts of domestic criminality, poverty etc.

In the cases you mention, you free the individual from the traffickers, break up the gangs, return the individual to their homeland if it is deemed a safe country - as Albania is (you're three times more likely to get murdered in the good ol' US of A than Albania).

No country is crime free, and it is the responsibility of the domestic government to try to make things as safe as possible. It is the Albanian government's responsibility to supply the sanctuary.

It is also quite easy to see an argument for Rwanda in this instance if these gangs are operating in the UK as well as Albania. Leaving the person here doesn't guarantee their security. Albanians are also the biggest foreign national grouping in the prison population at over 1,300.

If we are accepting people in, and they are then going missing , we are actually helping them to staff their gangs.
User avatar
Monkeybubbles
Posts: 13801
Joined: Sun Feb 02, 2014 11:00 am
Location: Rumble, Brighton, Tonight.
Has liked: 485 likes
Total likes: 1955 likes

Re: Migrants crossing the Channel

Post by Monkeybubbles »

bubbles1966 wrote: Tue Mar 14, 2023 9:36 am Is being the victim of a crime the same as being a refugee?

My understanding has always been that refugees were essentially people that were fleeing invasions, domestic civil wars or who were being persecuted or at risk of serious harm at the hands of the state in their own country. That was the spirit behind the rules.

It isn't for sorting out acts of domestic criminality, poverty etc.

In the cases you mention, you free the individual from the traffickers, break up the gangs, return the individual to their homeland if it is deemed a safe country - as Albania is (you're three times more likely to get murdered in the good ol' US of A than Albania).

No country is crime free, and it is the responsibility of the domestic government to try to make things as safe as possible. It is the Albanian government's responsibility.

It is also quite easy to see an argument for Rwanda in this instance if these gangs are operating in the UK as well as Albania. Leaving the person here doesn't guarantee security. Albanians are also the biggest foreign national grouping in the prison population at over 1,300.

If we are accepting people in, they are then going missing , we are actually helping them to staff their gangs.
Break up the gangs? I think the Italians have been trying that since the 1500s. This isn't a yardie street gang, it's a huge, sophisticated, powerful organisation. They make more profit than Amazon, Apple and Microsoft combined.

Notwithstanding that, I'd be very uncomfortable about sending an innocent person to their death in order to win a few votes. But then I'm not a Tory.

Rwanda have assented to taking how many asylum seekers from us? 200 is it?
Online
User avatar
delbert
Posts: 27177
Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2003 11:27 pm
Location: Barking, home of the slowly meandering Prius
Has liked: 699 likes
Total likes: 697 likes

Re: Migrants crossing the Channel

Post by delbert »

Monkeybubbles wrote: Tue Mar 14, 2023 10:15 am Break up the gangs? I think the Italians have been trying that since the 1500s. This isn't a yardie street gang, it's a huge, sophisticated, powerful organisation. They make more profit than Amazon, Apple and Microsoft combined.

Notwithstanding that, I'd be very uncomfortable about sending an innocent person to their death in order to win a few votes. But then I'm not a Tory.

Rwanda have assented to taking how many asylum seekers from us? 200 is it?
The governments of all the other countries that send them back are not Tory, so that cheap shot missed the target by a considerable amount. The fact the government of law and order has been importing criminals at an alarming rate should be your target.
Why we're not taking Albanians who claim to be children straight to the Albanian embassy for them to sort out is another question to be answered. That's how it works elsewhere isn't it? If a British kid was picked up entering another country their immigration people / local plod would pass them onto the UK embassy......
User avatar
bubbles1966
Posts: 66970
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2007 10:01 pm
Location: I'm holding onto nothing, and trying to forget the rest
Has liked: 2437 likes
Total likes: 4292 likes

Re: Migrants crossing the Channel

Post by bubbles1966 »

I'm honestly astonished to read a view against impeding criminal gangs recruitment activity and effectively helping facilitate it, as though that's a consequence free endeavour for society.
User avatar
Bend it like Repka
Posts: 15838
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2004 5:05 pm
Location: Shaking my head in despair at it all.
Has liked: 357 likes
Total likes: 794 likes

Re: Migrants crossing the Channel

Post by Bend it like Repka »

bubbles1966 wrote: Tue Mar 14, 2023 12:00 pm I'm honestly astonished to read a view against impeding criminal gangs recruitment activity and effectively helping facilitate it, as though that's a consequence free endeavour for society.
But that is this debate in a nutshell. You either want to do away with borders or you are a horrible person with no compassion in your heart.
User avatar
Jabsco79
Posts: 3376
Joined: Sun Nov 19, 2006 8:26 am
Has liked: 6 likes
Total likes: 21 likes

Re: Migrants crossing the Channel

Post by Jabsco79 »

There is no UK MSM network willing and capable of hosting a balanced, non-biased, non-hysterical, sensible debate about controlled immigration. Nobody sensible would appear on it to state the case for controlled as they know they’d be called ‘far right’ and ‘racist’ immediately post-programme. Free speech dead in this country, replaced by ‘acceptable speech’ acceptable only to those of far-left persuasion, otherwise, forget it.
User avatar
Danny's Dyer Acting
Posts: 8983
Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2009 1:37 pm
Has liked: 642 likes
Total likes: 1853 likes

Re: Migrants crossing the Channel

Post by Danny's Dyer Acting »

Jabsco79 wrote: Tue Mar 14, 2023 1:06 pm There is no UK MSM network willing and capable of hosting a balanced, non-biased, non-hysterical, sensible debate about controlled immigration. Nobody sensible would appear on it to state the case for controlled as they know they’d be called ‘far right’ and ‘racist’ immediately post-programme. Free speech dead in this country, replaced by ‘acceptable speech’ acceptable only to those of far-left persuasion, otherwise, forget it.
Both main parties want to decrease legal migration. Both are actually talking about wanting broadly similar points based systems.

Both main parties pinpoint the main issue with illegal migration as people arriving on boats across the channel. Both want to speed up processing of all claims to reduce costs of detaining people. Both want to deal with as much of the issue as possible before they reach the UK.

There is barely a cigarette paper between them. The only significant difference is that the Tories want to lump all of the people arriving by boat as one evil "other" that they can blame for your problems. The Labour position is that there would be a major impact on people with legitimate claims.

But sure, they'll chuck you in prison just for saying you're English these days.
User avatar
Turns to Stone
Posts: 15456
Joined: Mon Sep 22, 2008 10:21 am
Location: Tony Almeida
Has liked: 229 likes
Total likes: 1455 likes

Re: Migrants crossing the Channel

Post by Turns to Stone »

Bend it like Repka wrote: Tue Mar 14, 2023 12:06 pm But that is this debate in a nutshell. You either want to do away with borders or you are a horrible person with no compassion in your heart.
That's every debate in a nutshell, isn't it. Largely we're all on the same page on this thread. We all feel concerned and nervous about some of those attempting to cross our borders, but most of us also want to support legitimate asylum seekers and share our wealth and provision to give them a better life.

My issue (as with Brexit) is not so much the policies (or let's be honest, the lack thereof) it's the rhetoric and language used around it. I honestly believe that this government has no interest in solving the immigration crisis. And I don't think they have the first idea of how to do it even if they did. So I think they are resorting to using divisive and unnecessary language that lays the blame more at the door at the immigrants and away from them. Why the hell would they have promoted the likes of Braverman or Lee Anderson to such important posts otherwise?

I don't know if such a thing exists anymore, but I much prefer political parties and governments who attempt to unite countries than divide them. We seem a long way away from that at the moment.
User avatar
Greatest Cockney Rip Off
Posts: 19295
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2003 12:29 am
Location: The oil drum in the Garden of England
Has liked: 338 likes
Total likes: 728 likes
Contact:

Re: Migrants crossing the Channel

Post by Greatest Cockney Rip Off »

Danny's Dyer Acting wrote: Tue Mar 14, 2023 1:13 pm But sure, they'll chuck you in prison just for saying you're English these days.
Only if you say it on Twitter.
Online
User avatar
pbenjy
Posts: 1937
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2005 7:24 am
Location: Flying High
Has liked: 20 likes
Total likes: 52 likes

Re: Migrants crossing the Channel

Post by pbenjy »

Turns to Stone wrote: Tue Mar 14, 2023 2:14 pm I honestly believe that this government has no interest in solving the immigration crisis.
I think you are right. They are losing the argument on Brexit and the economy, so their only hope of winning the next election is to get everyone stirred up about immigrants.

Basically the problem is illegal immigration. If they were actually interested in solving it, they could try enforcing the laws we have already got.

Unfortunately in order to pay for adequately resourced police and border forces they would need to make sure that their rich mates pay their fair share of tax.
User avatar
Jabsco79
Posts: 3376
Joined: Sun Nov 19, 2006 8:26 am
Has liked: 6 likes
Total likes: 21 likes

Re: Migrants crossing the Channel

Post by Jabsco79 »

Turns to Stone wrote: Tue Mar 14, 2023 2:14 pm That's every debate in a nutshell, isn't it. Largely we're all on the same page on this thread. We all feel concerned and nervous about some of those attempting to cross our borders, but most of us also want to support legitimate asylum seekers and share our wealth and provision to give them a better life.

My issue (as with Brexit) is not so much the policies (or let's be honest, the lack thereof) it's the rhetoric and language used around it. I honestly believe that this government has no interest in solving the immigration crisis. And I don't think they have the first idea of how to do it even if they did. So I think they are resorting to using divisive and unnecessary language that lays the blame more at the door at the immigrants and away from them. Why the hell would they have promoted the likes of Braverman or Lee Anderson to such important posts otherwise?

I don't know if such a thing exists anymore, but I much prefer political parties and governments who attempt to unite countries than divide them. We seem a long way away from that at the moment.
They certainly give a first rate impression of a government which has given up on solving it, or even containing it. By taking that stance they have alienated the vast majority of their core support. Labour’s best campaign poster next year is a simple graph showing the numbers who have arrived in the past two years and the associated cost.
Post Reply