12 year old raped in nuneaton (37 Viewers)

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

Churchill will be turning in his grave. We stopped the Germans invading our country and now we let any old so and so in.

Well Churchill had a plan during the war to 'merge' Britain and France, so under that the boat crossings would be irrelevant as they'd already be 'here'.

 

---

[Brighton Sky Blue]

It’s odd as this is a Brittania hotel and although it does take paying guests it’s predominantly a migrant hotel -well it was a couple of years ago

The hotel still has recent reviews suggesting people have paid to stay there, and all the article says is he's 49 from Shropshire, not exactly the profile the poster was hoping for.

 

[Nick]

Often 4-5* hotels.... that sounds and smells like utter sh!te as most of this post is. Where did you get this from?
Also do some research on what illegal immigrants are actually 'given' or 'entitled' to it's available on plenty of proper researched websites and government ones too.

I've seen one first hand that we were meant to stay at which was a golf resort. We got moved to another hotel but still went back in the daytime for golf.

It had been trashed. Was like a third world country.

 

[CCFCSteve]

We could perhaps stop being tight arses and pay for a lot more staff to process all these claims. May even be cost neutral or save money once the hotel contracts are scrapped.

Not sure it’s a case of just throwing more people at it, the problem appears to be the system and that most individuals that get claims rejected are appealing and clogging up the process. There was an interesting article in the times yesterday about Coopers efforts to accelerate and streamline the appeals process.

‘Appeals by asylum seekers refused sanctuary take an average of 54 weeks to be heard. There were 50,976 outstanding appeals as of March, almost double the number compared with 2024 and seven times higher than in 2023. It is the highest the backlog has been and is on top of the almost 79,000 claims awaiting an initial decision’

So there’s 79k awaiting a decision, let’s assume 50% rejection so another 40k into the appeals systems then adding to that will be the weekly new arrivals. The system just can’t catch up until there’s changes to it. Hopefully that’ll happen soon

Said it before it’s the traffickers backed up by the ECHR lawyers and then the hotels that are making huge amounts from everyone else’s misery and it’s totally unacceptable

Ps I blame a fair bit of this on france, they’ve intentionally been lax and that’s encouraged more traffickers. The bizarre thing is it has probably also attracted more migrants to France as a consequence some of whom will end up staying there

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Not sure it’s a case of just throwing more people at it, the problem appears to be the system and that most individuals that get claims rejected are appealing and clogging up the process. There was an interesting article in the times yesterday about Coopers efforts to accelerate and streamline the appeals process.

‘Appeals by asylum seekers refused sanctuary take an average of 54 weeks to be heard. There were 50,976 outstanding appeals as of March, almost double the number compared with 2024 and seven times higher than in 2023. It is the highest the backlog has been and is on top of the almost 79,000 claims awaiting an initial decision’

So there’s 79k awaiting a decision, let’s assume 50% rejection so another 40k into the appeals systems then adding to that will be the weekly new arrivals. The system just can’t catch up until there’s changes to it. Hopefully that’ll happen soon

Said it before it’s the traffickers backed up by the ECHR lawyers and then the hotels that are making huge amounts from everyone else’s misery and it’s totally unacceptable

Ps I blame a fair bit of this on france, they’ve intentionally been lax and that’s encouraged more traffickers. The bizarre thing is it has probably also attracted more migrants to France as a consequence some of whom will end up staying there

Sorry, how are ECHR lawyers backing up the traffickers?

 

[Nick]

Sorry, how are ECHR lawyers backing up the traffickers?

He said it's them, the hotels and traffickers etc making money from it.

 

[Grendel]

He said it's them, the hotels and traffickers etc making money from it.

Yep but he will defend it somehow

 

[Grendel]

I've seen one first hand that we were meant to stay at which was a golf resort. We got moved to another hotel but still went back in the daytime for golf.

It had been trashed. Was like a third world country.

Cant be the one @PVA knows about. No issues and great behaviour apparently

 

[CCFCSteve]

Sorry, how are ECHR lawyers backing up the traffickers?

Meant to put that in quotes, as in those human rights lawyers that have historically have used the ECHR as a backstop for removals of criminals etc. so you’ve got a load of people who’s claims have been validly rejected unable to be removed due to (for want of a better phase) ambulance chasing lawyers and a system unfit for purpose

‘backing up the traffickers’ as in people will continue to pay traffickers if they see how difficult it is for us to remove those who’s claims failed/were rejected

 

[fatso]

We could perhaps stop being tight arses and pay for a lot more staff to process all these claims. May even be cost neutral or save money once the hotel contracts are scrapped.

That's presuming the government actually want the people processed, im becoming convinced that neither political party wants to stop or hinder immigration.

They just give out sound bites to placate the public, but the evidence would suggest they have no intention of actually doing anything that may slow the flood of people coming here.

 

[Grendel]

That's presuming the government actually want the people processed, im becoming convinced that neither political party wants to stop or hinder immigration.

They just give out sound bites to placate the public, but the evidence would suggest they have no intention of actually doing anything that may slow the flood of people coming here.

It’s irrelevant with these child rapists anyway - they can’t be sent anywhere

 

[fatso]

It’s irrelevant with these child rapists anyway - they can’t be sent anywhere

That might infringe their human rights!

 

[Nick]

Cant be the one @PVA knows about. No issues and great behaviour apparently

I think it was £150 odd per night, it was full of bikes, shopping trolleys and was like a shanty town outside. They had tried their best to separate the hotel from the golf resort but you had to drive round to get to it.

It was a 4 star place. No doubt Charlie and others will say it's made up.

 

[PVA]

Cant be the one @PVA knows about. No issues and great behaviour apparently

I don't know how they behave in the hotel.

All I know is there have been no issues outside the hotel.

 

[Grendel]

That might infringe their human rights!

Aghans can’t be returned

 

[shmmeee]

I think if the government won't do anything then the simplest solution is to not make this country quite the safe haven they think it is. It is getting worse and worse and will come to a head, at a guess, by the middle of next year. The hotel protests will look like child's play. Purely Conjecture of course

Would you like us to stop being rich or stop speaking English or stop being an ex colonial power?

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Yep but he will defend it somehow

‘That’s a bit out of order’ as the question was genuine.

 

[shmmeee]

Not sure it’s a case of just throwing more people at it, the problem appears to be the system and that most individuals that get claims rejected are appealing and clogging up the process. There was an interesting article in the times yesterday about Coopers efforts to accelerate and streamline the appeals process.

‘Appeals by asylum seekers refused sanctuary take an average of 54 weeks to be heard. There were 50,976 outstanding appeals as of March, almost double the number compared with 2024 and seven times higher than in 2023. It is the highest the backlog has been and is on top of the almost 79,000 claims awaiting an initial decision’

So there’s 79k awaiting a decision, let’s assume 50% rejection so another 40k into the appeals systems then adding to that will be the weekly new arrivals. The system just can’t catch up until there’s changes to it. Hopefully that’ll happen soon

Said it before it’s the traffickers backed up by the ECHR lawyers and then the hotels that are making huge amounts from everyone else’s misery and it’s totally unacceptable

Ps I blame a fair bit of this on france, they’ve intentionally been lax and that’s encouraged more traffickers. The bizarre thing is it has probably also attracted more migrants to France as a consequence some of whom will end up staying there

What’s your answer if not processing legally?

There’s always going to be huge numbers wanting to come here. Unless you’re pulling out of International Sea Law you’ve got to go get them once they’re in the channel. At which point you’re pulling out of the UN convention, and then you’ve got to find somewhere to send them after pulling out of a load of international treaties.

So what’s the plan? You can’t realistically guard the entire border 24/7, people smuggling will always happen at some level. I don’t seriously believe despite the billy big bollocks talk on here people seriously want dead bodies piling up or concentration camps building.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

That's presuming the government actually want the people processed, im becoming convinced that neither political party wants to stop or hinder immigration.

They just give out sound bites to placate the public, but the evidence would suggest they have no intention of actually doing anything that may slow the flood of people coming here.

The Tories don’t want to crack down on cheap immigration because it suits their interests just fine. As for Labour, perhaps they’re scared of being called racist or losing some core support.

Personally I see the issue as a red herring that distracts from the hard work and difficult answers people won’t want to see or do to improve the state of the country. Looking at foreigners might make people feel proud of themselves but they’re not the reason the country’s on its arse.

Hotels have got to stop being used as holding pens though, it should never have been a thing.

 

[Briles]

Would you like us to stop being rich or stop speaking English or stop being an ex colonial power?

Eh?

 

[shmmeee]

The Tories don’t want to crack down on cheap immigration because it suits their interests just fine. As for Labour, perhaps they’re scared of being called racist or losing some core support.

Personally I see the issue as a red herring that distracts from the hard work and difficult answers people won’t want to see or do to improve the state of the country. Looking at foreigners might make people feel proud of themselves but they’re not the reason the country’s on its arse.

Hotels have got to stop being used as holding pens though, it should never have been a thing.

Iron triangle of demographics is you either need lots of young people paying tax, the young people you have to pay a lot more tax, or savagely cut benefits for the elderly like care and pensions.

Labour have promised not to do the second and when they tried to do even a bit of the third got slapped back hard, all that’s left is import young people. I think this is why they and other governments are happy to focus on the comparatively tiny issue of boats.

 

[shmmeee]

Eh?

Lots of people want to come here because of those three reasons. English is probably the most spoken second language. Lots of places in Africa, ME and Asia have links to the UK because we used to own them, and people will always prefer to be in rich nations like the UK. If you want to reduce demand you’ve got to change those things.

 

[Nick]

Lots of people want to come here because of those three reasons. English is probably the most spoken second language. Lots of places in Africa, ME and Asia have links to the UK because we used to own them, and people will always prefer to be in rich nations like the UK. If you want to reduce demand you’ve got to change those things.

Yeah I'm sure it's just because of the language.

It's because of the hand outs and how easy it is. Straight from the beach to a hotel, money, clothes etc. they can then get work on the black market cash in hand if they want it alongside the hotel, meals, pocket money, phone etc.

Fuck all to do with us speaking English.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Iron triangle of demographics is you either need lots of young people paying tax, the young people you have to pay a lot more tax, or savagely cut benefits for the elderly like care and pensions.

Labour have promised not to do the second and when they tried to do even a bit of the third got slapped back hard, all that’s left is import young people. I think this is why they and other governments are happy to focus on the comparatively tiny issue of boats.

Sounds a bit Snapey to me.

 

[Grendel]

‘That’s a bit out of order’ as the question was genuine.

It’s pretty likely they are guilty. So what would you do with them on release?

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

It’s pretty likely they are guilty. So what would you do with them on release?

You're just here to light the contrarian touch paper.

 

[fatso]

The Tories don’t want to crack down on cheap immigration because it suits their interests just fine. As for Labour, perhaps they’re scared of being called racist or losing some core support.

Personally I see the issue as a red herring that distracts from the hard work and difficult answers people won’t want to see or do to improve the state of the country. Looking at foreigners might make people feel proud of themselves but they’re not the reason the country’s on its arse.

Hotels have got to stop being used as holding pens though, it should never have been a thing.

There are many many issues that politicians should be dealing with, but im afraid if you stop the pensioners winter fuel allowance, and cap child benefits, and try and roll out welfare reform in order to save £5billion pounds, while at the same time putting illegal immigrants in 4 star all inclusive hotel accommodation you deserve all the shit that comes your way.

And when our children get raped as a result of the piss poor policies implemented by consecutive governments we're entitled to be pissed off.

There is NO issue more important than protecting our children.

 

[Briles]

Lots of people want to come here because of those three reasons. English is probably the most spoken second language. Lots of places in Africa, ME and Asia have links to the UK because we used to own them, and people will always prefer to be in rich nations like the UK. If you want to reduce demand you’ve got to change those things.

I mean If English is the most Second spoken language then the 4 or 5 safe countries they pass through to get here should be fine for them to stay in

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

There are many many issues that politicians should be dealing with, but im afraid if you stop the pensioners winter fuel allowance, and cap child benefits, and try and roll out welfare reform in order to save £5billion pounds, while at the same time putting illegal immigrants in 4 star all inclusive hotel accommodation you deserve all the shit that comes your way.

And when our children get raped as a result of the piss poor policies implemented by consecutive governments we're entitled to be pissed off.

There is NO issue more important than protecting our children.

I don't know how many times this needs to be said, but there is no such thing as an illegal asylum seeker unless they have been denied and continue to stay. The problem long precedes the current government also. Do you at least accept that?

 

[shmmeee]

Yeah I'm sure it's just because of the language.

It's because of the hand outs and how easy it is. Straight from the beach to a hotel, money, clothes etc. they can then get work on the black market cash in hand if they want it alongside the hotel, meals, pocket money, phone etc.

Fuck all to do with us speaking English.

Have you got any evidence any of this is much worse than other countries? I’d support ID cards for example. What are the stats on percentage claiming vs what they’d get say in the major EU countries?

Here’s what ChatGPT gave me when I asked:




Think about yourself, if you’re moving somewhere surely family links and ability to speak the language. Also if you’re claiming asylum family links and ability to integrate work in your favour.

 

[Grendel]

You're just here to light the contrarian touch paper.

You can’t answer so you resort to childish behaviour. I suspect if you had such a hotel in your leafy Leamington street you’d be the first to bitch and moan about it.

This isn’t acceptable in any shape or form. You can’t have people landing here then raping children.

You seem far more interested in protecting the precious principal of asylum and accepting there will be some collateral damage as in this case

It’s just odd

 

[shmmeee]

I mean If English is the most Second spoken language then the 4 or 5 safe countries they pass through to get here should be fine for them to stay in

Is your argument that we should only take refugees from countries we share a border with?

 

[CCFCSteve]

What’s your answer if not processing legally?

There’s always going to be huge numbers wanting to come here. Unless you’re pulling out of International Sea Law you’ve got to go get them once they’re in the channel. At which point you’re pulling out of the UN convention, and then you’ve got to find somewhere to send them after pulling out of a load of international treaties.

So what’s the plan? You can’t realistically guard the entire border 24/7, people smuggling will always happen at some level. I don’t seriously believe despite the billy big bollocks talk on here people seriously want dead bodies piling up or concentration camps building.

Not sure I’m answering question or not but firstly, as mentioned, Coopers trying to change/accelerate the appeal process. That should relieve a lot of the pressure on the processing side, also the quicker the rejections/returns process, the more likely it will put off economic migrants

I’ve always thought processing centre(s) elsewhere would make more sense but I guess if you do that you have to cap numbers. Priority given to women and children and from most dangerous/unstable countries

Whilst I would never have bothered with the Rwanda plan to start with, as we’d already paid tens or hundreds of millions in setting it up, if id have been the current government, I would have used it for all those claimants who had been rejected (at least for solo males with maybe women and children remaining here). If they were subsequently accepted on appeal they would be brought back over here. Any criminal offence whilst going through claims process (or within specified period post acceptance) instant deportation, back to country of origin or if no papers/details returned to Rwanda

In terms of actually physically ‘stopping the boats’ it really needs to be France or they need to accept that anyone caught in waters could be returned, but they haven’t got the political will to do it. I know about maritime laws but presume if France agreed individuals could be returned

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

You can’t answer so you resort to childish behaviour. I suspect if you had such a hotel in your leafy Leamington street you’d be the first to bitch and moan about it.

This isn’t acceptable in any shape or form. You can’t have people landing here then raping children.

You seem far more interested in protecting the precious principal of asylum and accepting there will be some collateral damage as in this case

It’s just odd

I'm happy to talk with people who genuinely believe what they say. You've played the contrarian on here for years, it's mind numbingly tedious.

I've said countless times in the thread and others what I want to happen, it isn't for these hotels to continue being used as holding pens. People on this thread have openly cited Winston Churchill as an example of a good leader on this issue, then go quiet when it's pointed out that he stood for the principle that refugees can't be denied on the basis of how they entered the country, among other issues.

It is possible to argue for that principle to be upheld while also wanting the backlog to be cleared, the hotels to be returned to communities and for people to stop trying to cross the Channel in small boats. They aren't mutually exclusive.

 

[shmmeee]

Not sure I’m answering question or not but firstly, as mentioned, Coopers trying to change/accelerate the appeal process. That should relieve a lot of the pressure on the processing side, also the quicker the rejections/returns process, the more likely it will put off economic migrants

I’ve always thought processing centre(s) elsewhere would make more sense but I guess if you do that you have to cap numbers. Priority given to women and children and from most dangerous/unstable countries

Whilst I would never have bothered with the Rwanda plan to start with, as we’d already paid tens or hundreds of millions in setting it up, if id have been the current government, I would have used it for all those whose claimants who had been rejected (at least for solo males with maybe women and children remaining here). If they were subsequently accepted on appeal they would be brought back over here. Any criminal offence whilst going through claims process (or within period post acceptance) instant deportation, back to country of origin or if no papers/details returned to Rwanda

In terms of actually physically ‘stopping the boats’ it really needs to be France or they need to accept that anyone caught in waters could be returned, but they haven’t got the political will to do it.

The Rwanda scheme would have doubled the cost of processing and still may not have been able to process the numbers we get in. I think a max capacity of 20k was talked about. And it was starting in the hundreds.

When you talk about returning boats to France you’re talking about what exactly? Using the Royal Navy to enter French waters without permission?

Realistically you’re banking on being able to police the whole channel and have agreements with neighbouring countries.