No, I think you couldn’t resist throwing in a unfounded barb against people you disagree with in classic Dane style 
I mean, it was a strange experience reading that post and think ‘yep……that’s probably right….can’t disagree with that…that’s fair enough’ I’m sort of glad at the end you reverted to type.
Maybe he was highlighting the difference between say someone who buys a ticket, enters UK on a valid visa, tourist etc then claim asylum and would have leave to remain beyond his tourist visa Vs someone who says enter UK illegally on a truck, gets caught and claims asylum? Is that a difference UK distinguished amongst it’s asylum seekers?
No, the method of entry is not a factor.
Oh boy. You are confusing completely different things, exactly as the RW press and Tory mp’s and Farage want you to.
An asylum seeker is NOT an immigrant. They are seeking asylum. Under international law ANYONE can seek asylum in ANY country that has signed the 1951 convention.
So questions. As the uk is a founding member of the 1951 convention, how does someone running from Afghanistan claim asylum in the UK while on the run?
Second, how do they get here without those hunting them knowing or preventing them from doing so?
Thirdly, how does the UK know who is running, wanting asylum here, where they are, why they are running before they even get here?
Now in the absence of all the above, because I already know there are no answers to the above, if someone that wants to enter the UK under the radar for whatever reason then that is a completely different issue but then the question how do you identify and seperate one from another?
The whole system is fine but open to be twisted through misinterpretation and misdirection exactly as has geen done. The UKs failure to
address the fundamental issues has left ut wide open to this abuse from racists, those seeking to create anger and division, criminal gangs and so on.
Sorry what? If you are running from Afghanistan do you think you’d book a package holiday to get out?
Sorry, so to answer the question, no. The issue is the systems of checks etc. has been torn down which leads it open to the abuse we’re seeing and including the examples you give.
I’ll now apologise if I’m being a bit short but it frustrates me enormously when something thats really quite simple but needs strong government involvement and resources has been ripped to shreds for nothing but personal / personal gain and those that actually suffer and are marginalised are those that need the most help. It has also opened the uk to yet more corruption and criminality.
You do know there is middle ground between people with racist mindsets and people who campaign or protest to allow ALL migrants entry regardless of background or circumstances?
I’m not sure if you’re replying to me or otherwise but I’ll respond or otherwise. There is no spectrum here, its about what is right and what isn’t. For once its pretty black and white.
I want controlled immigration. That is sensible and perfectly normal. At the same time I want those running from persecution to feel the uk is a safe haven. They are two completely different things.
Immigration and seeking asylum are two different issues that have been merged together into one clusterfuck of a mess that it really shouldnt be. But hey its serves Farage really well.
As do most people.
Yet anyone who even suggests there should be caveats in place, is all too often labelled far right/racist/Farage follower.
Sadly it often is because that exact language you’ve quoted is not used. Most often its something crazy like shooting boats, streets in Leeds that dont speak English, Turkish barbers and so on. The discussion is never sensible, especially when dinghies are brought into it because of the reasons I mentioned in posts above.
For example
https://x.com/highbrow_nobrow/status/1849548642706772003
Thanks @Livvy for posting in the US election thread
for the third time, yes.
Well, as I have already said it has been under resourced over a period in which ancillary support has also been under resourced. As a process, it’s largely fine. Can always be improved upon and there will have been recent events it will have needed to adapt to as there will be in the future. Proper government focus will also help.
You’ll also have noted then that I said that more needs to be done and it was a step in the right direction.
Politically, that ‘middle ground’ has been dragged massively to the right to the point where what now passes as a reasonable position on immigration would have been considered pretty horrific a couple of decades ago.
Personally think current international asylum convention will fall like a card house, after one or two major countries will abandon it. Poland is already going down that road.
Hope I’m wrong, it’s a major human achievement.
I’m talking about people in general, not politicians.
Even better would be having no need for it but you know… @cynicaloldgit can finish this off.
Then people will largely ignore it and just move anyway. Climate change is going to spark waves of migration that we are totally unprepared for. It’s going to be biblical.
I think it works either way. What openly racist, right wing politics has done is give people permission to drag their opinions to the right too.
Or perhaps, maybe just maybe, most people are capable of forming their own thoughts and opinions.
Meanwhile in the US Trump might become president again.
You sure they can safely form well thought out opinions?
And of course we gave Boris a hugd 80+ seat majority, all based on a lie.
Yeah, no.
Fair point.
We even voted in Starmer and his entourage of scheming liars.
Well 33% of 60% did