1. Forum
  2. Usenet
  3. SOC.HISTORY.MEDIEVAL

  • Transportation parallels?

    From Surreyman@21:1/5 to All on Tue Mar 21 02:47:04 2023
    Is there much difference between the UK's 19th. century transportation of criminals to Australia, and the transportation of immigrants to Rwanda - apart from the fact that the latter haven't even stolen a loaf of bread yet .........

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From a425couple@21:1/5 to All on Tue Mar 21 09:00:40 2023
    On 3/21/23 08:45, a425couple wrote:
    On 3/21/23 02:47, Surreyman wrote:
    Is there much difference between the UK's 19th. century
    transportation of criminals to Australia, and the transportation of
    immigrants to Rwanda - apart from the fact that the latter haven't even
    stolen a loaf of bread yet .........

    Interesting, (I guess??)

    I googled, now I see:


    What is the UK's plan to send asylum seekers to Rwanda? - BBC

    BBC
    https://www.bbc.com › news › explainers-61782866
    Feb 23, 2023 — Rwanda says it can process 1,000 asylum seekers during
    the trial period, but has capacity for more.


    I read in the first:

    "The government says this will deter people arriving in the UK through "illegal, dangerous or unnecessary methods", such as on small boats
    which cross the English Channel.

    However, the numbers crossing have not fallen since the policy was
    announced on 14 April 2022.

    More than 45,700 people used this route to come to the UK in 2022, the
    highest figure since records began.

    Chart showing the number of people crossing the Channel in small boats 2019-2023

    --- I see the chart show:
    2019 ///
    2020 nearing 10,000
    2021 nearly 30,000
    2022 around 46,000
    2023 more so far than in 2022."

    Does a nation / state have a right to tell 'people'
    that they can not enter?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From a425couple@21:1/5 to Surreyman on Tue Mar 21 08:45:42 2023
    On 3/21/23 02:47, Surreyman wrote:
    Is there much difference between the UK's 19th. century transportation of criminals to Australia, and the transportation of immigrants to Rwanda - apart from the fact that the latter haven't even stolen a loaf of bread yet .........

    Interesting, (I guess??)

    I googled, now I see:


    What is the UK's plan to send asylum seekers to Rwanda? - BBC

    BBC
    https://www.bbc.com › news › explainers-61782866
    Feb 23, 2023 — Rwanda says it can process 1,000 asylum seekers during
    the trial period, but has capacity for more.

    Britain tenders $95 million contract to transport migrants

    Reuters
    https://www.reuters.com › article › britain-immigratio...
    4 days ago — Britain has tendered a 78 million pound ($94.75 million) contract for the transport of migrants to partner countries including
    Rwanda as ...

    U.K. can send asylum-seekers to Rwanda, High Court rules
    NPR
    https://www.npr.org › 2022/12/19 › britain-rwanda-migr...
    Dec 19, 2022 — The ruling comes months after the government introduced a
    plan to deport hundreds of potential asylum-seekers to Rwanda.
    Immigration lawyers ...

    UK strikes deal to transport asylum seekers to Rwanda

    Financial Times
    https://www.ft.com › Africa › Europe › UK immigration
    Apr 14, 2022 — Boris Johnson has announced plans to transport to Rwanda “tens of thousands” of migrants seeking asylum in the UK, in an attempt
    to deter ...

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Surreyman@21:1/5 to All on Tue Mar 21 12:14:57 2023
    On Tuesday, March 21, 2023 at 4:00:43 PM UTC, a425couple wrote:
    On 3/21/23 08:45, a425couple wrote:
    On 3/21/23 02:47, Surreyman wrote:
    Is there much difference between the UK's 19th. century
    transportation of criminals to Australia, and the transportation of immigrants to Rwanda - apart from the fact that the latter haven't even stolen a loaf of bread yet .........

    Interesting, (I guess??)

    I googled, now I see:


    What is the UK's plan to send asylum seekers to Rwanda? - BBC

    BBC
    https://www.bbc.com › news › explainers-61782866
    Feb 23, 2023 — Rwanda says it can process 1,000 asylum seekers during
    the trial period, but has capacity for more.

    I read in the first:

    "The government says this will deter people arriving in the UK through "illegal, dangerous or unnecessary methods", such as on small boats
    which cross the English Channel.

    However, the numbers crossing have not fallen since the policy was
    announced on 14 April 2022.

    More than 45,700 people used this route to come to the UK in 2022, the highest figure since records began.

    Chart showing the number of people crossing the Channel in small boats 2019-2023

    --- I see the chart show:
    2019 ///
    2020 nearing 10,000
    2021 nearly 30,000
    2022 around 46,000
    2023 more so far than in 2022."

    Does a nation / state have a right to tell 'people'
    that they can not enter?

    And the Home Secretary is now extolling the beautiful conditions that the immigrants just can't wait to get to - some deterrent!
    A total xxxxxxx-up all round.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From a425couple@21:1/5 to Surreyman on Fri Mar 24 15:14:02 2023
    On 3/21/23 12:14, Surreyman wrote:
    On Tuesday, March 21, 2023 at 4:00:43 PM UTC, a425couple wrote:
    On 3/21/23 08:45, a425couple wrote:
    On 3/21/23 02:47, Surreyman wrote:
    Is there much difference between the UK's 19th. century
    transportation of criminals to Australia, and the transportation of
    immigrants to Rwanda - apart from the fact that the latter haven't even
    stolen a loaf of bread yet .........

    Interesting, (I guess??)

    I googled, now I see:

    ------


    Does a nation / state have a right to tell 'people'
    that they can not enter?

    And the Home Secretary is now extolling the beautiful conditions that the immigrants just can't wait to get to - some deterrent!
    A total xxxxxxx-up all round.

    Yo ! Surreyman,
    Care to vent your opinions more?
    Or am I so lost on this subject it is not worth it?

    Meanwhile, I found and read an interesting one that mentions
    both UK to Rwanda, and Australian deportations:

    https://theconversation.com/a-toxic-policy-with-little-returns-lessons-for-the-uk-rwanda-deal-from-australia-and-the-us-201790

    ‘A toxic policy with little returns’ – lessons for the UK-Rwanda deal from Australia and the US
    Published: March 24, 2023 9.11am EDT
    Author
    Julia Morris
    Assistant Professor of International Studies, University of North
    Carolina Wilmington

    Disclosure statement
    Julia Morris does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive
    funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this
    article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their
    academic appointment.

    CC BY ND
    We believe in the free flow of information
    Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative
    Commons license.

    One afternoon in mid-June, I sat with Ethan*, a local islander, at
    Nauru’s boat harbour. He was speaking about how life had changed in the country since the asylum deal with Australia was agreed. Just a few
    years before my arrival in 2016, the small Pacific island had once again
    been financed to process the asylum claims of migrants attempting to
    reach Australia. If successful, refugees would be resettled locally
    around the island. Successive Australian governments had taken a tough zero-tolerance approach, making sure that anyone making their way by
    boat without documentation would “never settle in Australia”.

    Not far from where we sat, placards covered the fence of a refugee
    resettlement compound, reading: “We’re refugees not criminals,” and “Freedom is a Right Not a Crime, We Want Justice.”

    “The thing is none of them want to be here,” Ethan explained, “and we don’t know who these people are, they could be dangerous. Why else does Australia not want them?” These fears were echoed to me numerous times
    in Nauru. “I’m so worried about having the refugee children in our school,” Sandra, --------snip

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Surreyman@21:1/5 to All on Sat Mar 25 01:14:29 2023
    On Friday, March 24, 2023 at 10:14:04 PM UTC, a425couple wrote:
    On 3/21/23 12:14, Surreyman wrote:
    On Tuesday, March 21, 2023 at 4:00:43 PM UTC, a425couple wrote:
    On 3/21/23 08:45, a425couple wrote:
    On 3/21/23 02:47, Surreyman wrote:
    Is there much difference between the UK's 19th. century
    transportation of criminals to Australia, and the transportation of
    immigrants to Rwanda - apart from the fact that the latter haven't even >> stolen a loaf of bread yet .........

    Interesting, (I guess??)

    I googled, now I see:

    ------

    Does a nation / state have a right to tell 'people'
    that they can not enter?

    And the Home Secretary is now extolling the beautiful conditions that the immigrants just can't wait to get to - some deterrent!
    A total xxxxxxx-up all round.
    Yo ! Surreyman,
    Care to vent your opinions more?
    Or am I so lost on this subject it is not worth it?

    Meanwhile, I found and read an interesting one that mentions
    both UK to Rwanda, and Australian deportations:

    https://theconversation.com/a-toxic-policy-with-little-returns-lessons-for-the-uk-rwanda-deal-from-australia-and-the-us-201790

    ‘A toxic policy with little returns’ – lessons for the UK-Rwanda deal from Australia and the US
    Published: March 24, 2023 9.11am EDT
    Author
    Julia Morris
    Assistant Professor of International Studies, University of North
    Carolina Wilmington

    Disclosure statement
    Julia Morris does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive
    funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their
    academic appointment.

    CC BY ND
    We believe in the free flow of information
    Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.

    One afternoon in mid-June, I sat with Ethan*, a local islander, at
    Nauru’s boat harbour. He was speaking about how life had changed in the country since the asylum deal with Australia was agreed. Just a few
    years before my arrival in 2016, the small Pacific island had once again been financed to process the asylum claims of migrants attempting to
    reach Australia. If successful, refugees would be resettled locally
    around the island. Successive Australian governments had taken a tough zero-tolerance approach, making sure that anyone making their way by
    boat without documentation would “never settle in Australia”.

    Not far from where we sat, placards covered the fence of a refugee resettlement compound, reading: “We’re refugees not criminals,” and “Freedom is a Right Not a Crime, We Want Justice.”

    “The thing is none of them want to be here,” Ethan explained, “and we don’t know who these people are, they could be dangerous. Why else does Australia not want them?” These fears were echoed to me numerous times
    in Nauru. “I’m so worried about having the refugee children in our school,” Sandra, --------snip

    I wasn't aware of the Nauru parallel - very telling - apart from the fact that Rwanda also has the added attractions of having fairly recently murdered around one million of its inhabitants on racist grounds ....
    Gary Lineker was spot on with his comments - and was temporarily kicked out of the BBC.
    I just cannot comprehend how any civilised nation can even consider such policies.
    Revolting.
    And maybe we should.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From a425couple@21:1/5 to Surreyman on Fri Mar 31 09:59:31 2023
    XPost: soc.history.war.misc

    On 3/25/23 01:14, Surreyman wrote:
    On Friday, March 24, 2023 at 10:14:04 PM UTC, a425couple wrote:
    On 3/21/23 12:14, Surreyman wrote:
    On Tuesday, March 21, 2023 at 4:00:43 PM UTC, a425couple wrote:
    On 3/21/23 08:45, a425couple wrote:
    On 3/21/23 02:47, Surreyman wrote:
    Is there much difference between the UK's 19th. century
    transportation of criminals to Australia, and the transportation of
    immigrants to Rwanda - apart from the fact that the latter haven't even >>>> stolen a loaf of bread yet .........

    Interesting, (I guess??)

    I googled, now I see:

    ------

    Does a nation / state have a right to tell 'people'
    that they can not enter?

    And the Home Secretary is now extolling the beautiful conditions that the immigrants just can't wait to get to - some deterrent!
    A total xxxxxxx-up all round.
    Yo ! Surreyman,
    Care to vent your opinions more?
    Or am I so lost on this subject it is not worth it?

    Meanwhile, I found and read an interesting one that mentions
    both UK to Rwanda, and Australian deportations:

    https://theconversation.com/a-toxic-policy-with-little-returns-lessons-for-the-uk-rwanda-deal-from-australia-and-the-us-201790

    ‘A toxic policy with little returns’ – lessons for the UK-Rwanda deal >> from Australia and the US
    Published: March 24, 2023 9.11am EDT
    Author
    Julia Morris
    Assistant Professor of International Studies, University of North
    Carolina Wilmington
    ---------------

    “The thing is none of them want to be here,” Ethan explained, “and we >> don’t know who these people are, they could be dangerous. Why else does
    Australia not want them?” These fears were echoed to me numerous times
    in Nauru. “I’m so worried about having the refugee children in our
    school,” Sandra, --------snip

    I wasn't aware of the Nauru parallel - very telling - apart from the fact that Rwanda also has the added attractions of having fairly recently murdered around one million of its inhabitants on racist grounds ....
    Gary Lineker was spot on with his comments - and was temporarily kicked out of the BBC.
    I just cannot comprehend how any civilised nation can even consider such policies.
    Revolting.
    And maybe we should.

    Dear Surreyman, I understand you are upset and unhappy.
    You have not clearly said what you think should be done.

    Are you feeling that any foreign individual who gets upon
    the shores / airport of the United Kingdom should be allowed
    to stay and do (work / wander / eat / sleep) as they wish?

    Did you feel that way in 1941 and 1942?

    What is your opinion on Muammar Al Gaddafi's 2006 Speech?

    TIMBUKTU 10 APRIL 2006
    Muammar Al Gaddafi's Speech:
    Islam Will Conquer Europe Without Firing a Shot.
    If we want to mend the state of humanity, and live in a global village, beacause of the globalization, we must search for the true Bible,
    beacause the Bible that exists today is a forgery. Today's Bible does
    not mention Muhammad, whereas our Lord's Bible mentions Muhammad
    repeatedly. We must search for the Gospel of Barnabas, of St. Barnabas, beacause this is the true gospel. This gospel explicitfy mentions that
    Muhammad would corne after Jesus. Today , we are correcting human
    history from here, in Timbuktu.
    WE HAVE FIFTY MILLION MUSLIMS IN EUROPE. THERE ARE SIGNS THAT ALLAH WILL
    GRANT ISLAM VICTORY IN EUROPE - WITHOUT SWORDS, WITHOUT GUNS, WITHOUT
    MILITARY CONQUESTS. THE FIFTY MILLION MUSLIMS OF EUROPE WILL TURN IT
    INTO A MUSLIM CONTINENT WITHIN A FEW DECADES. ALLAH MOBILIZES THE MUSLIM
    NATION OF TURKEY, AND ADDS IT TO THE EUROPEAN UNION. THAT'S ANOTHER 50
    MILLION MUSLIMS. THERE WILL BE 100 MILLION MUSLIMS IN EUROPE. ALBANIA ,
    WHICH IS A MUSLIM COUNTRY, HAS ALREADY ENTERED THE EU. BOSNIA , WHICH IS
    A MUSLIM COUNTRY, HAS ALREADY ENTERED THE EU. 50% PERCENT OF ITS
    CITIZENS ARE MUSLIMS. EUROPE IS IN A PREDICAMENT, AND SO IS AMERICA.
    THEY SHOULD AGREE TO BECOME ISLAMIC IN THE COURSE OF TIME, OR ELSE
    DECLARE WAR ON THE MUSLIMS.

    The USA is quite fortunate. We have large numbers coming in from the
    south, that are mostly Roman Catholic. Also they have a long history
    of assimilating well. But I do think the people, through the
    government, does have a right and duty to control immigration by
    numbers and by individuals.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)