Iraqi asylum cheat who got £700,000 in benefits, three houses and private school

[alexxxxx]

If you have open borders across Europe then you have no control via your borders. Just now we have the government proposing a limit on non-EU immigration because it has no power to limit EU immigration. The issue of asylum is also jointly linked because they travel across the European Union to get here - most of Europe is 'free' according to the European Union, so why do they feel the need to across numerous countries and the English Channel to come here?

Could it possibly be benefits?.. mm I do wonder.

are you stupid?

an illegal immigrant should be stopped by our border controls (we are an island for heaven's sake). asylum seekers are not always penniless and destitute - they will get on a plane. the rule is that asylum seekers have to stop in the first safe country they come across - which is what the majority do.

this has absolutely NOTHING to do with immigration whatsoever. this is to do with an asylum seeker which are completely different things - but the mailites like to put them all into one thing.

i doubt this family didnt have money to start with. they lived in a £1million house whilst having swindled £700k - where did the other £300k come from?

The EU had nothing to do with this benefit fraud. But again EU/Immigration/Asylum Seekers - they're all the same thing..

[-:Undertaker:-]

are you stupid?

an illegal immigrant should be stopped by our border controls (we are an island for heaven's sake). asylum seekers are not always penniless and destitute - they will get on a plane. the rule is that asylum seekers have to stop in the first safe country they come across - which is what the majority do.

this has absolutely NOTHING to do with immigration whatsoever. this is to do with an asylum seeker which are completely different things - but the mailites like to put them all into one thing.

i doubt this family didnt have money to start with. they lived in a £1million house whilst having swindled £700k - where did the other £300k come from?

The EU had nothing to do with this benefit fraud. But again EU/Immigration/Asylum Seekers - they're all the same thing..

It must be the other way around, because if you look at a map with the pair of eyes you have been given then you can see that infront of the United Kingdom there are various safe countries (France, Germany, Czech Republic, Spain, Portugal, Italy, Switzerland, Turkey, Russia, Ukraine etc etc etc etc) - meaning with your explanation of it, we'd end up with no asylum seekers at all.

I never said they were all the same, had you read what I put you would see (using your eyes again) that I set out what I think of both asylum policy, immigration policy and the EU open door policy.

It's a really old news story but it did make me wonder who the real criminals are.

Is there really any need for the 'Iraqi' bit in the headline though? It's once again the Daily Mail's continued attack against the ethnic minorities. There will also be white people abusing the benefits system we've got as well and it's rather sad how the media continues to attack certain groups (teenagers as another example). However, she should be deported. If we let them in, they must follow our rules but thankfully, the majority of them do.

Oh another attack on a newspaper, and you quote the Guardian in response as though its on a higher level.. I mean come on now. :rolleyes:

The media attack immigrants/asylum seekers because the system is totally out of control, we have lazy people here (the media havent mentioned skin colour at all, you are the one who has brought that up) but we dont need more lazy people from other countries now, do we?

Do we need more lazy people from other countries to add to an already bloated welfare state - answer me that.

Directly, it didn't bring about the rise of the Nazis, but it is partly the reason why the Nazis in to power - if it wasn't for all the failed coalitions governments, Hindenburg would never have been swayed to let Hitler become chancellor and the nazis to form a majority with the DNVP.

The Nazis got a good proportion of the vote though, so you are basically arguing for an end to voting incase a lunactic party such as the Nazi Party gain power. It isnt an excuse to discount my vote or millions of other votes around this country.

[MrPinkPanther]

If somebody does not like gays then they should be allowed to say that - that is freedom of speech. It must not though, incite violence against people.

So tell me in the 1920's and 1930's did your average piece of propaganda incite violence? Did your average German walk around telling people to kick Jews heads in? No. It was a gradual transition. Inciting hatred towards a population is only one step away from inciting violence. They come hand in hand. The Nazis were only the catalyst, by the 1930's the anti-semetic feeling was so strong that something simply HAD to happen against them. Hitler was reportedly furious about early violent attacks on the Jews, he hadn't started them, it was out of even the Nazis control.

The rise of the Nazi Party was quite unrelated about the Jewish issue, infact it was mostly other factors hence why when the Third Reich did fall and and extent of the death camps was revealed (a suprise even to the Allied Forced) it was shock and horror at what had been done - a lot was done in secret.

Of course it was done in secret but that changes absolutely nothing? I'm talking about the anti-semites in the transition period from the 1920's and 1930's because the Nazis only capitalised on the wave of anti-semitism, they didn't create it themselves. It had already spread. Oh and the Allied forces did know about Auschwitz and death camps, Churchill wished to bomb them but they were deep in enemy territories and only the Americans flew by day, the British wouldn't have been able to locate them accurately.

Anyway, alas I feel we may be getting a little bit off topic here

[Axel]

It must be the other way around, because if you look at a map with the pair of eyes you have been given then you can see that infront of the United Kingdom there are various safe countries (France, Germany, Czech Republic, Spain, Portugal, Italy, Switzerland, Turkey, Russia, Ukraine etc etc etc etc) - meaning with your explanation of it, we'd end up with no asylum seekers at all.

I never said they were all the same, had you read what I put you would see (using your eyes again) that I set out what I think of both asylum policy, immigration policy and the EU open door policy.



Oh another attack on a newspaper, and you quote the Guardian in response as though its on a higher level.. I mean come on now. :rolleyes:

The media attack immigrants/asylum seekers because the system is totally out of control, we have lazy people here (the media havent mentioned skin colour at all, you are the one who has brought that up) but we dont need more lazy people from other countries now, do we?

Do we need more lazy people from other countries to add to an already bloated welfare state - answer me that.



The Nazis got a good proportion of the vote though, so you are basically arguing for an end to voting incase a lunactic party such as the Nazi Party gain power. It isnt an excuse to discount my vote or millions of other votes around this country.

My point is that no matter how democratic proportional representation is, it'll just lead to politically unstable coalitions, which won't help the country at all.

[MrPinkPanther]

My point is that no matter how democratic proportional representation is, it'll just lead to politically unstable coalitions, which won't help the country at all.

I'd put democracy over a large majority any day. The fundamental principle of a government is that it is supposed to represent the people, if you elect it using "First past the post" then it doesn't accurately portray the countries viewpoint as a whole which means that the government is, to put it bluntly, illegitimate. The Liberal Democrats and Conservatives are about as different as you can get in mainstream politics but they seem to be doing quite well and as a result the Government reflects a wider array of views.

[Inseriousity.]

Oh another attack on a newspaper, and you quote the Guardian in response as though its on a higher level.. I mean come on now. :rolleyes:

The media attack immigrants/asylum seekers because the system is totally out of control, we have lazy people here (the media havent mentioned skin colour at all, you are the one who has brought that up) but we dont need more lazy people from other countries now, do we?

Firstly, I have never said the Guardian is on a higher level. I don't even read it, I actually saw the article outside my sociology classroom and searched Google to find it. I just quoted it to prove my point the very same way that you and many others use the Daily Mail to prove yours. Nothing wrong with that?

Secondly, stop being so naive, you know as well as I do that when people say 'Iraqi' (as mentioned in the title of this thread), they don't exactly think of white people. No we do not need lazy people from other countries but we do need to stop attacking them as if they're the only lazy people in Britain, which is the message that the Daily Mail puts across. That's my opinion, you're obviously going to disagree with it and there's nothing wrong with that either.

[alexxxxx]

It must be the other way around, because if you look at a map with the pair of eyes you have been given then you can see that infront of the United Kingdom there are various safe countries (France, Germany, Czech Republic, Spain, Portugal, Italy, Switzerland, Turkey, Russia, Ukraine etc etc etc etc) - meaning with your explanation of it, we'd end up with no asylum seekers at all.

i don't have numbers on this but i suspect the largest number of people come on PLANES. anyone who's come through any other country isn't a true asylum seeker. the people who live around french ports are illegal immigrants (in france) and to-be illegal immigrants in the UK - not true asylum seekers.

I never said they were all the same, had you read what I put you would see (using your eyes again) that I set out what I think of both asylum policy, immigration policy and the EU open door policy.

well it doesn't really belong in this thread does it?