Comments by "robs2020" (@sbor2020) on "“Was Starmer Elected To Destroy This Country?” | Alex Phillips" video.

The Royal National Lifeboat Institution (RNLI) is a charity run by volunteers who risk their lives to save people at sea, regardless of who they are. It’s disheartening to see a life-saving organization accused of something as serious as human trafficking. These volunteers do an incredible job in dangerous situations, and it’s important to separate fact from misinformation. This type of populist rhetoric distracts from the real issues, like the tragic deaths of asylum seekers in the English Channel. These deaths are a direct result of the chaos caused by post-Brexit policies, which the very populists making these accusations have contributed to. Demonising a life-saving charity like the RNLI only shifts blame away from the policy failures that have worsened the crisis. It's essential to focus on the facts and address the real causes of this humanitarian tragedy.
5
Which British values do they hate? Which one do you hate? Maybe the acceptance and tolerance of different religions, cultures, and beliefs?
3
It’s incorrect to label asylum seekers as "illegal". According to international law, people have the right to seek asylum regardless of how they arrive in a country. Their legal status isn't determined until their asylum claim has been fully processed and either accepted or rejected. If they were truly 'illegal,' they could be arrested immediately, but that's not how the process works. Until their case is decided, they cannot be classified as 'illegal.' This is upheld by the 1951 Refugee Convention, which the UK is a signatory to, ensuring that seeking asylum is a legal right, not a crime.
2
@MuggyMeasures It's a common misconception that refugees must apply for asylum in the first safe country they reach, but that's not what the 1951 Refugee Convention states. This myth is often pushed by populist politicians and certain media outlets like Talk TV and GB News, which can create confusion and fear around the issue of migration. In reality, the Convention recognises that refugees may have valid reasons for seeking asylum in a different country, such as family connections, language barriers, or fears of returning to their home country. For instance, many refugees fleeing conflict in Syria may first reach countries like Turkey or Lebanon but choose to seek asylum elsewhere due to various personal circumstances. Media narratives that oversimplify the refugee crisis often prey on our psychological tendencies to fear the unknown. By framing refugees as a burden rather than individuals with stories and struggles, these narratives can create a divisive atmosphere. Instead of fostering understanding, they complicate the issue, leading to public misunderstanding and hostility towards refugees.
2
@keplermission4947 Explain what you mean, and how what I say is wrong!
2
@tonyfraser1749 First of all, what specific narratives or claims do you consider to be false, and what evidence do you have to support that view?
2
Don't buy into this numptiness either.
2
@andyetheridge Apartment not big enough.
2
@susanarthur-itsmyname I get where you’re coming from, but it’s important to remember that many people come to the UK due to its historical colonial past and the impacts of conflict, such as wars and political instability in their home countries. For instance, individuals from countries like Syria, and Afghanistan often migrate seeking better opportunities, safety, and a chance to build a new life. This movement isn’t about rejecting their own cultures; rather, it’s about enriching the UK with their diverse backgrounds and experiences. Cultural exchange works both ways! While newcomers share their traditions, many also respect and appreciate British culture.
2
@janetblackford8450 Thanks for sharing your thoughts. I’m not blaming anyone, just pointing out common patterns I’ve observed. I get that we don’t agree, and I’m fine with that, after all everyone has their own perspective. My aim isn’t to assume or impose, just to discuss ideas. Let’s keep the conversation about the issue, not personal assumptions. All the best.
2
"Boris" had to resign over a slice of cake ... No thinking involved.
1
@straightouttacornwall If by "off on one" you mean challenging the lies spread by populists and the misinformation their followers spread, then yes, I absolutely am. It's important to stand up against false narratives and ensure the facts are heard, especially when it comes to issues like asylum seekers and human rights.
1
@Moodyblue-o9n Because they were wrong to do so?! Plus not "everyone".
1
@Elbaldy-f5p My home is not my country, and my country is not my home.
1
@Wee_Chuck2634 They are applying for refugee status. I have explained that according to international law, people have the right to seek asylum regardless of how they arrive in a country. Their legal status isn't determined until their asylum claim has been fully processed and either accepted or rejected . What does international law say about the right to seek asylum? Does a person's legal status in a country depend on how they arrive there? Why or why not? What must happen before a person's legal status is determined according to their asylum claim?
1
@Moodyblue-o9n While I understand the concerns about costs, it’s essential to remember that the previous government was slow to act, and post-Brexit policies have significantly impacted the situation. Populist politicians often shift the blame away from these policy failures and scapegoat migrants to rally their base. Unfortunately, their allied media rarely promotes open dialogue or workable solutions. Instead of fostering constructive conversations, they tend to sensationalise the issue, which only deepens divisions. We need to push for discussions that address both the humanitarian needs of those seeking asylum and the genuine concerns of local communities.
1
@bl4531 I don't care what word you used for asylum seekers before, I've stated legal process. I've also stated that it is a myth they have to register in the first "safe country". These are the facts, and the what it states in international law.
1
@neilgillespie4498 I understand your concerns, but I believe we should strive for an immigration policy that is fair and equal. It's important to address skill shortages and promote work and study exchanges, as well as support those seeking asylum in desperate need. This isn't about "replacement" but about creating opportunities for everyone and enriching our communities.
1
@tonyfraser1749 I asked you what specific narratives or claims you consider to be false. And I asked what evidence you have to support that view.
1
@neilgillespie4498 Immature! You are unable to engage with issues intelligently.
1
@Daisy-tl2lh The term "irregular immigration" It was increasingly adopted by international organizations, such as the United Nations and the European Union, in the 1990s and early 2000s. They sought to emphasize the irregularity of the administrative situation rather than label the individuals themselves as "illegal."So three decades ago institutions started using it, not last week!
1
@tonyfraser1749 You have not explained which "false narratives". More BS, is it?
1
@gracecollins8415 If you come from Iran, Syria, or Afghanistan, there are currently no established safe and legal routes to enter the UK. Recent legislation mandates that asylum claims should be made through these "safe and legal routes"' However, because these pathways are limited to specific nationalities, many people from countries in crisis are effectively excluded from accessing legal ways to seek asylum in the UK. If there are no legal ways for people from certain countries to enter the UK, how can they come legally? What does this mean for how fair the system is?
1
@gracecollins8415 Typical diversion tactic. Pointing out the law doesn't mean I don't care for my own people. Stick to the issue.
1
@tonyfraser1749 International law! If you can't tell an opinion from stating the legality of an issue, you need to try harder.
1
@phildavies6020 I entirely agree with you. Postwar immigration is very different from the global migration patterns we see today. But pulling out of the ECHR just because current refugee laws aren't perfect isn’t the right move. Instead, we should be looking at how to update international laws to better reflect today’s realities while still protecting fundamental human rights.
1
@D--p-ff9sr I am glad you explained "Illigal" (sic). Call asylum seekers what you like if it makes you feel better. But wanting something to be so doesn't make it so. Who wished it? This is delusional!
1
@D--p-ff9sr 🤣🤡
1
@D--p-ff9sr Far from being a problem, immigration is essential to sustaining economic growth in the UK. Without it, the country's declining birthrate, increasing retirement population, and low unemployment rates would severely limit the workforce needed to maintain current levels of productivity and innovation. Immigration not only fills gaps in the labour market but also contributes to economic dynamism and resilience in the face of demographic shifts.
1
What is you goal? To destroy English punctuation?
1
What specific actions has Keir Starmer taken that make you believe he is a traitor? Can you provide any evidence or examples of how his decisions have harmed the country or Labour Party's interests? How do you define "traitor" in a political context, and how does Starmer’s behaviour align with that definition?
1
Saying they are illegal, doesn't make them so. Trying to make the UK into a North Korea will not work.
1
@Hector-bj3ls Nothing illegal about it either.
1
@thomaschampion6444 Through the back door - is that a legal term? 😆No one is illegal , just as no one is guilty until proven innocent. However, if your asylum claim has been rejected, you are residing in the country illegally and are subject to deportation. This is not difficult to understand. Brexit significantly impacted the handling of migrant crossings. The UK lost access to EU cooperation mechanisms, such as the Dublin Regulation, which allowed asylum seekers to be returned to the first EU country they entered. Without these agreements, the UK must negotiate new arrangements and manage border controls independently. This has made it more challenging to manage and return migrants crossing the Channel.
1
@alanwilton6806 This kind of thinking promotes unnecessary fear and division. It creates an "us vs. them" mentality by generalising entire cultures as a threat, which oversimplifies complex social issues. Blaming politicians and claiming that tolerance is causing a downfall is a classic feature of conspiracist thinking, where people in power are seen as betraying the population. Instead of fostering fear, we should focus on understanding diverse perspectives and finding common ground, rather than assuming hostility from others based on their culture.
1
@jonwoodmass2849 My country is not my family. My family is not my country. It's simple.
1
@andyetheridge The typical right-wing response to serious issues is often to distract, divert, and divide. Let’s look at the facts. In 2016, you likely voted to leave the EU, including withdrawing from political agreements like the Dublin Agreement with France, which coordinated how asylum seekers were handled. You did this, I presume, to "protect our borders." But what many didn’t realise is that France is also focused on protecting its own borders. By stepping away from these agreements, we lost a cooperative system for managing asylum seekers effectively. Then in 2019, I presume you supported “Boris” Johnson’s promise to "Get Brexit Done." Yet after that, the government failed to follow through on key aspects of handling immigration. They didn’t negotiate a proper bilateral treaty with France to manage asylum claims or set up processing centres for asylum seekers before they reach UK shores. Instead of addressing the situation they helped create, they had done nothing meaningful to fix it. Populist politicians thrive on shifting the blame when their promises fall flat. They turn the attention away from their own failings and point fingers at the most vulnerable – whether that’s immigrants or asylum seekers. Another right-wing tactic is to individualise the issue, as you've done here – shifting responsibility onto others, instead of holding your leaders accountable for their lack of action. This problem isn’t about individuals but about the responsibility of those in power to follow through on their promises and protect both our borders and our values in a fair, humane way.
1
@baylessnow Does blaming others help solve the problem, or does it distract from the real issues?🤔
1
@kevinbillington9773 Striving for a migration policy rooted in fairness and justice isn't about creating a utopia; it's about setting standards that prioritise human dignity and accountability. It's not about blindly trusting the establishment, but about pushing for policies that are transparent and grounded in human rights, so politicians can't easily scapegoat vulnerable groups or dodge responsibility. While human nature is imperfect, it doesn’t mean we should abandon efforts to create more just societies. Every progressive policy - whether it was ending apartheid, expanding civil rights, or establishing labour laws - faced resistance. Many said they were "utopian" too, but they made life better for ordinary people. A just migration policy can be part of that same legacy. The key is vigilance and pressure from people who care about fairness and justice.
1
@MsJk29 Yes, on both sides, and both forms of violence are significant, but recent trends show extremist right-wing attacks becoming more frequent and dangerous.
1
@andyetheridge How do you think the Conservative government could have more effectively managed immigration after Brexit, and what role should international cooperation play in addressing these issues?
1
@baylessnow Address the issues, don't play the victim.
1
@jeannemillsom9300 Well Theresa May did when she appointed "Boris" "Kerfuffle" Johnson in July 2016 at a time when he had dual citizenship. He later revoke the US citizenship. But to you numptariate it doesn't count?
1