Calais 'migrants' - stop using that word

Galwayguy35

The Bulgarians have put up 50 miles of razor wire to keep them out, baffles me why the French don't do the same.

Cameron was right when he called them a swarm, a swarm of locusts it looks like with the way they are wrecking Calais.

foggy_lad

The French need the same police that Maggie Thatcher used on the Minors and poll tax protestors!

and the Mediterranean situation should be treated the same as the Americans treated the Cubans for so many years, If you landed on american soil you got to stay but if found in the water you were returned to where you came from(Libya/Algeria/Morocco etc).

not yet

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

The Bulgarians have put up 50 miles of razor wire to keep them out, baffles me why the French don't do the same.

Cameron was right when he called them a swarm, a swarm of locusts it looks like with the way they are wrecking Calais.

A bit calais callous don't you think..

Galwayguy35

not yet wrote: »

A bit calais callous don't you think..

No.

Edit.

Woosh

Went over my head at first glance.

not yet

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

No.

The only difference between them and you is luck, luck in where and when you where born, I'm not saying the answer is open up all boarders but a little compassion wouldn't go amiss...

So much for there but for the grace of god and all that.

not yet

foggy_lad wrote: »

The French need the same police that Maggie Thatcher used on the Minors and poll tax protestors!

and the Mediterranean situation should be treated the same as the Americans treated the Cubans for so many years, If you landed on american soil you got to stay but if found in the water you were returned to where you came from(Libya/Algeria/Morocco etc).

Sweet mother of jesus, Thatcherism is alive and well and living in Ireland of all places..

Galwayguy35

not yet wrote: »

The only difference between them and you is luck, luck in where and when you where born, I'm not saying the answer is open up all boarders but a little compassion wouldn't go amiss...

So much for there but for the grace of god and all that.

Typical lefty spiel there, let them go the legal route if they want to improve their situation.

They have a couple of grand each it seems to pay the traffikers so why not use that money to do it the right way instead of thinking they have a right to enter a country on the back of a lorry.

DeadHand

not yet wrote: »

The only difference between them and you is luck, luck in where and when you where born

I'd venture the biggest difference between them and I is that I'm not willing to break laws or use violence to achieve my economic aims.

That and I'm also somewhat compatible with harmonious life in a modern democracy- not being the indoctrinated product of a violently misogynistic, homophobic and intolerant culture/religion.

not yet

DeadHand wrote: »

I'd venture the biggest difference between them and I is that I'm not willing to break laws or use violence to achieve my economic aims.

That and I'm also somewhat compatible with harmonious life in a modern democracy- not being the indoctrinated product of a violently misogynistic, homophobic and intolerant culture/religion.

The fact that luck dictated where and when you where born gave you the opportunity to be the above, I'd hazard a guess that if you where born in one of these countries you too would be seeking a better life by any means at your disposal..

not yet

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

Typical lefty spiel there, let them go the legal route if they want to improve their situation.

They have a couple of grand each it seems to pay the traffikers so why not use that money to do it the right way instead of thinking they have a right to enter a country on the back of a lorry.

If you equate compassion with ''lefty spiel'' then yeah you're right.

Realt Dearg Sec

DeadHand wrote: »

I'd venture the biggest difference between them and I is that I'm not willing to break laws or use violence to achieve my economic aims.

That and I'm also somewhat compatible with harmonious life in a modern democracy- not being the indoctrinated product of a violently misogynistic, homophobic and intolerant culture/religion.

Aren't you a great lad altogether? Not willing to break any laws, nor in a position where you might ever have to. The sheer lack of empathy, "I'm grand so **** you", is mind boggling.

Wompa1

RichardCeann wrote: »

Some Native Americans estimate that there up to 320 million illegal immigrants in the US.

Technically some of the Southern States were bought about 100 years ago..so, not the entire 320 million but yes...

Realt Dearg Sec

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

The Bulgarians have put up 50 miles of razor wire to keep them out, baffles me why the French don't do the same.

Cameron was right when he called them a swarm, a swarm of locusts it looks like with the way they are wrecking Calais.

Typical right wing, dehumanizing spiel there.

As an aside, Calais is an absolute and total ****hole, you couldn't wreck it with an earthquake.

DeadHand

Realt Dearg Sec wrote: »

Aren't you a great lad altogether? Not willing to break any laws, nor in a position where you might ever have to. The sheer lack of empathy, "I'm grand so **** you", is mind boggling.

What do you know about me?

We do know the illegal aliens in Calais are there illegally and many are trying to use violence to cross the channel.

Shall I get you a tissue? You seem upset.

Realt Dearg Sec

DeadHand wrote: »

What do you know about me?

We do know the illegal aliens in Calais are there illegally and many are trying to use violence to cross the channel.

Shall I get you a tissue? You seem upset.

No I'm grand. Not sure where you got that notion from friend.

Hans Bricks

Have they begun shooting the sequel to Children of Men there yet ?? Cracking film.

Just a 2 hour long single running scene of Clive Owen traversing and dodging knife wielding Arabs and Eritrean rape gangs, while he tries to find his way on to the back of a barge heading across the English channel.

not yet

DeadHand wrote: »

What do you know about me?

We do know the illegal aliens in Calais are there illegally and many are trying to use violence to cross the channel.

Shall I get you a tissue? You seem upset.

Desperate times etc...

What is an illegal alien anyway, some phrase used by Right wing bureaucrats to brainwash the wannabe smug middle class.

jungleman

not yet wrote: »

Desperate times etc...

What is an illegal alien anyway, some phrase used by Right wing bureaucrats to brainwash the wannabe smug middle class.

"Alien" is an American term which was used to dehumanise people.

RichardCeann

not yet wrote: »

Desperate times etc...

What is an illegal alien anyway, some phrase used by Right wing bureaucrats to brainwash the wannabe smug middle class.

Somebody who enters a country without permission, passport or paperwork.

Galwayguy35

not yet wrote: »

If you equate compassion with ''lefty spiel'' then yeah you're right.

Realt Dearg Sec wrote: »

Typical right wing, dehumanizing spiel there.

As an aside, Calais is an absolute and total ****hole, you couldn't wreck it with an earthquake.

I notice neither of you answered the question I asked though, why don't they use the couple of grand they paid to get that far to get citizenship through legal means.

DeadHand

jungleman wrote: »

"Alien" is an American term which was used to dehumanise people.

alien

noun

a person owing allegiance to a country other than that in which he lives; foreigner


From Collins' dictionary. A perfectly valid term for the illegal immigrants in question.

Realt Dearg Sec

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

I notice neither of you answered the question I asked though, why don't they use the couple of grand they paid to get that far to get citizenship through legal means.

I assume getting citizenship isn't just a matter of handing over a pile of cash. Anyway the reason I didn't answer is because I wasn't addressing the question, I was addressing your use of terms whose sole purpose is to allow you to think of those people as animals rather than people in a desperate situation. Just admit you couldn't give a **** rather than pretending to yourself or others that they are just scam artists and not in a desperate situation at all. Sure, you'll look like you have no soul, but it'll save you the bother of dreaming up excuses and rationalizations for your callousness. So there's that.

Eutow

Realt Dearg Sec wrote: »

I assume getting citizenship isn't just a matter of handing over a pile of cash. Anyway the reason I didn't answer is because I wasn't addressing the question, I was addressing your use of terms whose sole purpose is to allow you to think of those people as animals rather than people in a desperate situation. Just admit you couldn't give a **** rather than pretending to yourself or others that they are just scam artists and not in a desperate situation at all. Sure, you'll look like you have no soul, but it'll save you the bother of dreaming up excuses and rationalizations for your callousness. So there's that.

What are they trying to escape from in France? Picking and choosing which European country they want to go to means they are not in a desperate situation. France should deport any of those people that are there illegally.

SeanW

Realt Dearg Sec wrote: »

Typical right wing, dehumanizing spiel there.

As an aside, Calais is an absolute and total ****hole, you couldn't wreck it with an earthquake.

Well I bet this insanity has not helped.

jungleman wrote: »

"Alien" is an American term which was used to dehumanise people.

BULL****.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/alien?s=t

Origin of alien
Middle English
Middle French
Latin
1300-1350
1300-50; Middle English < Middle French < Latin aliēnus, equivalent to *alies- (ali-, base of alius other + -es- noun suffix) + -nus adj. suffix

Alien, first used in 1300-1350 deriving from Latin, that was a more than a little bit the United States was even thought of.

Herb Powell

Nah OP, nothing particularly PC about the word migrant.

They're still on the move, so I'd say it's technically more correct than calling them immigrants.

Shhit buzz all round though.

Hans Bricks

Eutow wrote: »

What are they trying to escape from in France? Picking and choosing which European country they want to go to means they are not in a desperate situation. France should deport any of those people that are there illegally.

They'll be in for a shock when they see how much sterling is against the euro.

whisky_galore

DeadHand wrote: »

I'd venture the biggest difference between them and I is that I'm not willing to break laws or use violence to achieve my economic aims.

That and I'm also somewhat compatible with harmonious life in a modern democracy- not being the indoctrinated product of a violently misogynistic, homophobic and intolerant culture/religion.

Oh how quickly we forget...we weren't always a 'great bunch of lads':

"The Irish fill our prisons, our poor houses... Putting them on a boat and sending them home would end crime in this country."

http://www.irishcentral.com/roots/history/Irish-Famine-refugees-caused-a-crime-wave-in-New-York-City-stats-show-.html

kingchess

What I do not understand is why are they so set on getting into the UK?what can the UK offer that France can not??They must have crossed Europe to get to Calais so why not try and settle in the EU? what is the great advantage to them to get into the UK?

Peregrinus

kingchess wrote: »

What I do not understand is why are they so set on getting into the UK?what can the UK offer that France can not??They must have crossed Europe to get to Calais so why not try and settle in the EU? what is the great advantage to them to get into the UK?

They are only a tiny, tiny fraction of the total number of migrants entering the EU - contrary to what the Daily Mail would like us to believe, Britain is not a massively popular destination for asylum seekers. So it's probable that the factors which draw them to the UK are largely factors personal to themselves. Perhaps they have family or (former) neighbours already in the UK, or some other network that they think will make it easier for them to settle. Perhaps they have particular educational or vocational skills that they think they can turn to better advantage in the UK than elsewhere. Perhaps they already speak English, and feel they will do better in an English-speaking society. Perhaps they read the Daily Mail and have fallen for it's guff about the UK being a soft touch for asylum seekers.

endacl

liz lemoncello

For my personal observation, I've noticed that the use of "migrant" is used more often on sites such Comment is Free in The Guardian where previously, they would have used the term "refugee". There were always a lot of posters claiming that the people referred to weren't all refugees, some were economic migrants. I assumed the switch to "migrant" recognized that people in Calais, for example, might be either.

Makes sense to me.

Jinonatron

UK fabricates Weapons of Mass Destruction excuse for invasion of Iraq. Invasion of Iraq leads to toppling of Saddam Hussein. Jihadi headcases overrun Iraq. Jihadi head cases cause local population to flee for safety. Where do they go. To the UK because it is such a free and liberal society. If the UK cannot instil it's values in Iraq why not move Iraq to the UK.

The Corinthian

riffmongous wrote: »

And white and western!

I've also come across the good foreigner/ bad foreigner distinction but I'll happily refer to myself as an ausländer, don't even think anything of it anymore

I find the word Herrenvolk pretty much covers it.

not yet wrote: »

If you equate compassion with ''lefty spiel'' then yeah you're right.

'Compassion' is an easy trait to have when you need not be responsible for it's consequences. The consequences to actual asylum seekers that are forced into a situation whereby their needs are drowned out by economic migrants masquerading as fellow asylum seekers. Or the consequences of a sustained shock to any nation's infrastructure of an influx of zero-skilled and in many cases unemployable (what job can someone who cannot speak your language at all do, out of interest?) surplus population can have on any nation. Or the consequences of large numbers who arrive with no means to shelter or feed themselves will have on public finances or infrastructure who, out of 'compassion', are essentially forced to feed and shelter them indefinitely.

This may not be a big deal to any idiot who does not consider the consequences or expects others to pay the price, but fortunately cooler minds are in the majority and will generally keep us from being led down the path to ruin by such irresponsible good intentions.

So, feel free to lecture when you take a few economic migrants in to live under your (or your parent's, I suspect) roof. Or can give them gainful employment. But as long as you seek that others pay for your 'compassion', expect to be treated with the contempt that you deserve.

not yet

The Corinthian wrote: »

I find the word Herrenvolk pretty much covers it.

'Compassion' is an easy trait to have when you need not be responsible for it's consequences. The consequences to actual asylum seekers that are forced into a situation whereby their needs are drowned out by economic migrants masquerading as fellow asylum seekers. Or the consequences of a sustained shock to any nation's infrastructure of an influx of zero-skilled and in many cases unemployable (what job can someone who cannot speak your language at all do, out of interest?) surplus population can have on any nation. Or the consequences of large numbers who arrive with no means to shelter or feed themselves will have on public finances or infrastructure who, out of 'compassion', are essentially forced to feed and shelter them indefinitely.

This may not be a big deal to any idiot who does not consider the consequences or expects others to pay the price, but fortunately cooler minds are in the majority and will generally keep us from being led down the path to ruin by such irresponsible good intentions.

So, feel free to lecture when you take a few economic migrants in to live under your (or your parent's, I suspect) roof. Or can give them gainful employment. But as long as you seek that others pay for your 'compassion', expect to be treated with the contempt that you deserve.

Wow...

If you bothered to read anything I posted on this thread you would know I said 'I'm not saying the answer is open all boarders' or 'there but for the grace of god'..

Your smugness and arrogance really are a sight to behold. I have at no stage said I want anyone to pay for my compassion, I'm sure you know where you can stick your contempt btw..

The Corinthian

not yet wrote: »

If you bothered to read anything I posted on this thread you would know I said 'I'm not saying the answer is open all boarders' or 'there but for the grace of god'..

Really, because other than bellyaching about compassion and luck, you don't really suggest what the answer might be at all - or did I miss something? Seriously, other than complaining, did you offer any constructive suggestions?

Your smugness and arrogance really are a sight to behold. I have at no stage said I want anyone to pay for my compassion, I'm sure you know where you can stick your contempt btw..

I know you don't want to pay for your compassion. You'd rather complain about other people's lack of compassion and perhaps wait until they pay. To do that, to post what you have posted, then accuse others of smugness is frankly hilarious and deserving of nothing but our contempt.

not yet

The Corinthian wrote: »

Really, because other than bellyaching about compassion and luck, you don't really suggest what the answer might be at all - or did I miss something? Seriously, other than complaining, did you offer any constructive suggestions?

I know you don't want to pay for your compassion. You'd rather complain about other people's lack of compassion and perhaps wait until they pay. To do that, to post what you have posted, then accuse others of smugness is frankly hilarious and deserving of nothing but our contempt .

No, No I didn't offer any constructive suggestions, I Didn't realise it was a prerequisite of boards to have a solution to any thread or issue...

I'm out of this discussion with your good self since I've brought on myself the contempt of the whole of boards..


Please accept my sincerest apologies for any offence I've caused you or your kind..

The Corinthian

not yet wrote: »

Please accept my sincerest apologies for any offence I've caused you or your kind..

Awe diddums. Me and my kind - those not buried so far up our own arses as to perpetually live in a fantasy of moral superiority - accept your apology and respectfully ask you close the door behind you on your way out.

jank

This situation makes a mockery of the rules governing EU asylum seeking. The Dublin regulation is meant to be followed here, yet the French Government are more then happy to ignore it and not apply it, because it is in their interest for these illegals to move to the UK. The whole thing needs a rethink. The longer governments ignore it, the greater the rise of political movements that will seek a mandate to sort this out.

lawred2

What I don't get is if all these people are fleeing conflict zones; then surely peaceful France would be sufficient...

Why the great efforts to escape France and make it to the UK?

not yet

lawred2 wrote: »

What I don't get is if all these people are fleeing conflict zones; then surely peaceful France would be sufficient...

Why the great efforts to escape France and make it to the UK?

I'm Guessing they have family/friends/contacts there, plus it may be seen as more accommodating then France etc..

The language Cameron used to describe these people is one step up from calling them scum. Regardless of what side of the argument you are these are still human beings..

JustTheOne

lawred2 wrote: »

What I don't get is if all these people are fleeing conflict zones; then surely peaceful France would be sufficient...

Why the great efforts to escape France and make it to the UK?

English speaking.

lawred2

JustTheOne wrote: »

English speaking.

Ah... Fair point.

It's a sorry state of affairs.

JustTheOne

lawred2 wrote: »

Ah... Fair point.

It's a sorry state of affairs.

Doesn't bode well for Ireland.

Pretzill

On the OP - I thought migrant was a shortened version of migrating - as they haven't reached their place of choice yet - when they do they will be immigrants to the UK and will have emigrated from their own country.

(No dictionaries were perused in this theory)

On the Calais situation - I used to travel Dover to Calais quite often from about ten years ago when these people were trying to reach the UK. There wasn't as many then - and they weren't as insistent - never saw small children like today either - mainly young men perhaps following relatives who had been successful and spun great stories of a new life. There was a time when many Irish believed the same stories about London and some did well out of it.

The difference now it seems the risk are huge - no real thought for safety along the journey - it's a horrible indictment of the countries they are leaving that they don't care if their citezins die trying - not just through Calais because that's only a small part of this exodus. And relatively safer in comparison to a leaky boat.

We need to offer safe harbour (pardon the pun) to any people fleeing war and then incentives to return to their own country to rebuild a better one after the war. But we need to balance this with keeping are own country safe and beneficial for our citezins too. It's a mess at the moment across Europe and something needs to be done. Semantics over what people fleeing are called is trite imo.

crockholm

not yet wrote: »

No, No I didn't offer any constructive suggestions, I Didn't realise it was a prerequisite of boards to have a solution to any thread or issue...

I'm out of this discussion with your good self since I've brought on myself the contempt of the whole of boards..


Please accept my sincerest apologies for any offence I've caused you or your kind..

TBF...The Corinthian has a very valid point,even if he doth argue more akin to a Spartan (hehehe).Good intentions and shared feelings of humanity do not pay even for the short term costs of the current crisis.

The Nordic countries are an area that I like to use in these discussions because,having lived there and having a Scandi spouse and kids,seeing their modus operandii,which is much better financed and implemented as a model for intergration than anything coming out of Ireland at the minute.

And the costs are staggering,you are in effect,bankrolling strangers to live off you,free of charge,for at least 3 years while they learn the language and customs of the host nation.You (john q.taxpayer) pick up the bill for everything-housing,electricity,transport,food,recreation,education and after all this,the refugees/migrants have a very low rate of participation in the workplace (26% of the asylum seekers who arrived in Denmark in 2003 are currently employed)and a lot of those jobs are at the lower end of the wage scale.

You may feel that you owe them this as a common courtesy to your fellow humans,or you may feel somewhat embittered by the negative effects that you and your family are experiencing as the state cuts back on other services in order to pay for the costs of the immigrants.

What you see in Ireland at the moment is small potatoes,when you start to get about 15,000 to 20,000 people showing up at your doorstep with an expectation of being housed and fed indefinitely and you start noticing less nurses, less road works,longer hospital queues,35 pupils per class,etc etc,you may ask yourself "Have I done right by my family ? "

Je suis tres mal

Can we suggest unwanted?

jank

not yet wrote: »

I'm Guessing they have family/friends/contacts there, plus it may be seen as more accommodating then France etc..

Excuse me but so what? A) that is not what asylum seeking is about its illegal C) it is against EU rules that so many are quick to put forward as a reason why Ireland has to accept asylum seekers from half the world away. The rules are obviously not applied to the governments that agreed to them, so why do we still talk about the Dublin Regulation as if its some unchangeable unbreakable force in this context?

not yet

jank wrote: »

Excuse me but so what? A) that is not what asylum seeking is about its illegal C) it is against EU rules that so many are quick to put forward as a reason why Ireland has to accept asylum seekers from half the world away. The rules are obviously not applied to the governments that agreed to them, so why do we still talk about the Dublin Regulation as if its some unchangeable unbreakable force in this context?

At no point did I argue they should be allowed in...
But some common ground needs to be found as the issue is not going to go away. I simply stated that I feel some pity and compassion for these people on a human level, whereas some on here like to treat a tiny bit of humanity with contempt..

ISIS are sound

Why are they so desperate to get to the UK? If they're refugees why don't they go to the nearest safe country?

The Rape of Lucretia

Maybe we could all just settle on the term 'itinerant' and avoid the problems of 'im'/'em'/' '-migrant ?

noun
1.
a person who travels from place to place.



Non controversial and acceptable to everybody ?