Would anyone actually vote for corbyn

Pretty sure worship of mortals is frowned upon in the Qu'ran

 

I take that bit back then if true. My main point was I wouldn't want him back in this country and tax payers paying for his keep in jail. Not to mention it would be a risk to security

 

Germany saw the most non-EU asylum seekers in 2014 - almost 203,000 - followed by Sweden, Italy, France, Hungary, and then the UK.




http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-29074736

 

And what was the proposed approach to arrest and extradite him?

 

What compels them to travel thousands of miles, across multiple borders, in order to make a new life on British soil? François Hollande’s France is hardly a war-torn dystopia, so why not stay there?
The first point is that the vast majority of refugees don’t come anywhere near western Europe. Indeed, as the UNHCR points out, 86% of all refugees are in developing countries. That’s a dramatic surge from 70% just a decade ago. About one in four refugees are from Syria: 95 out of every 100 of them are in a neighbouring country. Turkey – whose GDP per capita is about four times less than that of Britain – hosts nearly 1.6 million refugees, more than any other country. Lebanon, which has a population of less than 4.5 million, has up to 1.5 million Syrian refugees. Countries with far fewer resources than Britain are taking in many more refugees.


That may well be the case, but why can’t the rest of western Europe pull their weight? Here, the myth of excessive British generosity needs confronting. Earlier this year, Britain had taken in only 143 Syrian refugees: since the civil war began,Germany has taken in around 100,000. Britain had 31,745 applications for asylum in 2014; but in Sweden – whose population is nearly seven times smaller than ours – there were 81,180 such applications. France had more than twice as many, and Germany – with 202,245 applications – had more than six times the British rate. And Britain accepts substantially fewer than other countries: just 10,050 positive decisions last year, compared to 30,650 in Sweden, 12,550 in the Netherlands (with a population nearly four times smaller than Britain’s), 14,815 in France, 40,560 in Germany, 20,580 in crisis-ridden Italy and 15,410 in tiny Switzerland.
<aside class="element element-rich-link element-rich-link--tag element--thumbnail element-rich-link--upgraded" data-component="rich-link-tag" data-link-name="rich-link-tag" style="float: left; margin: 0.3125rem 1.25rem 0.75rem -15rem; clear: both; width: 13.75rem; color: rgb(51, 51, 51); font-family: 'Guardian Text Egyptian Web', Georgia, serif; font-size: medium; line-height: 24px;">
[h=1]The stories you need to read, in one handy email[/h]
<svg width="24" height="24" viewBox="0 0 24 24" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg"><g fill="none" fill-rule="evenodd">
</path></g></svg>
Read more



</aside>Those Calais migrants desperately trying to enter the British mainland are being attracted by an excessively generous British state, so the story goes. They are poor wherever they are, and unless they have children, refugees are better off in France; there are similar restrictions on work in both France and Britain; rents are substantially cheaper in Paris compared to London; and asylum seekers in both France and Britain are provided with healthcare and education for children.
Those heading for Britain are a minuscule proportion of the world’s refugee population. Disproportionately, they tend to be educated; with a grasp of English that they believe will make it easier to settle down and get in work than in a country where they don’t speak the native tongue; often a cultural link with Britain, because it used to be a former colonial power; or they have friends, family, or a settled community in the UK. There are those who, in effect, believe the entire world’s refugee population should be settled in substantially poor countries which are already overwhelmed. There is a debate to be had about how to solve a growing global refugee crisis, sure. But to do it properly, we need to at least have the facts right – and stop indulging the myth that Britain is the global magnet of refugees – it isn’t.





http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/aug/07/britain-refugee-magnet-sudanese-channel-tunnel

 

Did he really need a trial? Come on, we all saw what this maniac was doing and would have continued to do had he not been stopped. It may be unpalatable to some but there are times when these actions are not only justified but essential.

 

Oi....gioer letting facts get in the way of a bit of good old hysteria

It's terrible having a politician with some clout who actually believes in something other than the lining of their own pockets.

 

He will never get in power. I'm not daft. But not because I doubt him or his policies, but because the establishment won't allow it. Too many people, too much money etc, all riding on the status quo remaining exactly that. Sadly. Hence the incessant campaign through Tory media (which is practically all media these days) to smear or discredit him, lie about him, and so on.

 

England is a small island and a fraction of the size of Germany France or Italy and much harder to get to to seek aslym. Do you really expect us to take as many refugees as Germany France or Italy?

 

Germany 80 million, France 65 million, Italy 60 million, UK 64 million. Populations. Nowt between em.

Use this site to compare size of countries too: http://www.ifitweremyhome.com/compare/GB/IT

A fraction of the size? Again, very little between em.

 

And England isn't an island. The UK is.

 

I'd vote for him.

 

Did I say population?? No terms of land Germany Italy France are much bigger than England and even the uk. But you still think we should take the same amount of refugees.

 

I've just given you the link which compares the size of the countries, by land. It shows that whilst Germany and France are bigger, it's not by much at all. It certainly proves you wrong when (like the media) you suggest wildly "we're a fraction of the size". And we're bigger than Italy.


I'm dealing in facts. You're dealing in fear.

 

Germany isn't much bigger than the uk in area ye okay. I agree with you on alot of footballing matters but I don't agree with your theory of why these immigrants in callias are travelling through safe countries in Europe then risking there lives to get to the uk.

 

I have offered you the facts. Have a look at the posts further up. Not my theories, but facts, copied and pasted for you. Explaining the reasons a very tiny proportion of refugees want to enter the UK.

But you say it's "the last thing we need".


Why?

 

I offered you the fact that Germany France Italy ect are much bigger in area than the uk but you still believe we should be taking the same amount of refugees.
I started this post as I saw another ridiculous comment from corbyn after his ira sympathising and ji had John comments I'd still vote for jeremy kyle before jeremy corbyn. So we will have to agree to disagree.

 

I like Corbyn..........I like some of the things he says..........he gets a lot of things right ..........but on other things, like his views on immigration, I don't like.
And those views, such as the ones on immigration, will sink him - will sink the Labour Party - and importantly, which Corbyn has to come to terms with, will sink the people that rely on the Labour Party.

Thing is.......Jeremy Corbyn has killed my long standing interest in politics.

I cant get interested anymore, because I know at the next general election the Labour Party is going to be annihilated - some big names in the Labour Party will lose their seats.

As it stands.........Her Majesty's Opposition now resides in the Tory back benches......the Tory back benches have realised that Labour have given up the ghost in their official role as the opposition party and for the sake of the country its the Tory back benches now that are putting the Government to task

If there was a general election tomorrow...........I wouldn't be voting..........and that would be the first time abstention for me.

 

Yes

 

You didn't offer me any facts. You said we were a fraction of the size of those countries. I then gave you facts which made a mockery of your claim. But yep, I'll agree to disagree.