Read it yesterday. Loved the bit that says 'the dog-whistle rhetoric of Hammond and May' which just about sums it up as well as possible.
Read this from today, it is not directly about refugees or immigrants, but give typical reasons why a so-called peaceful nation sooner or later manages to create more: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/aug/11/turkish-kurds-who-want-peace-but-not-at-any-price
Nice piece in today's Guardian - http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/aug/10/10-truths-about-europes-refugee-crisis?CMP=EMCNEWEML6619I2
Helps to put things in perspective.
Thank you. Because I have two contracts open, I have already started my next book. Therefore, as it would happen (between 0600 and 0800 this morning for instance) I am looking at my field, children's rights, but looking at the history of human rights, which it is part of.
For some people the first known point is the Cyrus Cylinder in the British Museum which is said to be the words of the first king of the Persian Empire after her conquered Babylon in 539BC, freed the slaves, gave people the right to choose their own religion and instituted racial equality. The main four points are repeated as the first four points in the preamble of the UDHR. OK, perhaps the cylinder is a bit built up by people who want it to be the 'birth' of human rights but to me what it says is: we have been a bl**dy long time not going very far at all.
Yes Peter - it just 'suits' far too many people to have things just the way they are. How they love their rule books and controls.
Excellent (and eloquent!) Brian!
The 'dark' side of me would just love to see what would happen to all those 'immigrant haters' in, particularly but not exclusively Western Europe - if they themselves were ever forcibly displaced. I just wonder how'd they'd feel if the shoe was on the other foot? But that will never happen.....will it?......
Spot as usual BM. All that was lacking was the Martin Luther "I have a dream" bit !
Unfortunately we all know yours and my hopes will never come to fruition. Too many world powers have to much to lose and they won't want to share or risk losing what they/we already have.
Yes, we are guardians of planet Earth with common vested interests and we are all equal but some of us are more equal than others...
World peace as well as equality and brotherhood and the like are just pie in the sky.
Bravo mate! Those of us who work in the human rights world say more or less the same day in, day out. The real response, never said, by politicians is that they do not want to spend the money on other people's problems. We tend to respond back to say that they are willing to spend vast amounts of money on armaments, including investment in the companies supplying 'both' sides in any conflict and to be used (largely wasted fortunately) at vast expense to provoke even more aggression. More aggression, more refugees, more investment in weapons to fight the bad guys and less for the direct victims.
As Lis says, we are dealing with lives, but the unspoken is that by not doing enough we are contributing to ending lives along with many people being physically and mentally hurt, dispossessed in their own countries and all the rest of the complicated compendium of things that could be described. A lot is best not said (or written) and whilst some people say that there are many others suffering 'compassion fatigue' it is still the combination of wrong, too little/incomplete and misleading information that feeds that. As Peter says, Germany is pulling its weight more than the UK, but then people are turning against that there too, for exactly the same reasons, media feeding selectively thus influencing what people think.
There is no easy solution. To force news services to give comprehensive, unbiased information is a form of censorship which is rated worse than tolerating propagandist type of reporting that we often have now. There is always the option of informing oneself, but people have diverse interests that largely do not include reading vast amounts of often boring and sometimes quite gory accounts of what is going on in the world. The fact that there are (officially, but probably more) about 35 conflict situations, numerous natural disasters that include famine and drought, a couple of countries economically unable to cope any longer and so on goes past the vast majority of people. We live, as a rule, in the safe complacency of our own four walls where none of this touches us. If the truth be known, it is not quite that secure at all. We got quite close to the 'fuse' of conflict being lit over Ukraine two years ago. Had that ticking bomb gone off we may well have been the ones seeking assistance today. It was close, but generally kept well away from the public, however the mobilisation of particular international bodies in preparation was a giveaway to those of us who see those things going on. We all share one planet, we are one single species and unique in that we are the only one that could engineer its own extinction at the 'push of a button'. In fact we should be working together, reconciling all differences to find a way to make the resource under our feet work for all people. That was the sentiment behind setting up the UN in 1948. On 10 December it will be 67 years old, eight weeks younger than me. I admit my human failings, the UN needs to admit its own and use its capability of gathering the world together to actually sit down for however long to hack this out. Then Mark's question will never need to be asked again, at least I would hope.
That's true Liz (and Simon) but however good our intentions are we can't save the whole world ! But we can do our bit.
Germany has set an example to us all by homing vast numbers of migrants. The UK is trailing behind and should be taking more responsability.
I don't think taking in people willy-nilly will help anyone but a more intensely structured entry by application of asylum etc may help ?
Hear hear Simon…
Sadly discussions often go completely hey wire, and at times one wonders what the discussion was all initial about?
However, this one is a serious one, we are dealing with human lives! Yes, I can only repeat, we are very lucky to live where we live, we have had a choice as to where we live, we have clean running water, we switch the light on, just like that, lots of these poor people fleeing horrendous backgrounds, that I personally think none of us can even begin to imagine.
Just remember we all live on the same planet, and I would have thought we ought to help each other, not fight each other, however, sadly that does not seem so, it never has and I doubt it never will be! 
I give up!
I have been trying, but obviously failing (!), to point out that, as Europeans, we are immensely privileged in our relative ease of travel and relocation. There are no wars in Western Europe, no overt persecution and we are unlikely to be shot at by our respective States any time soon. On the other hand, the poor 'refugees' trying desperately to escape these atrocities are being treated as scum by the very people actually able (and rich enough) to help them. In Calais we are unable to provide them with even basic shelter like that afforded to refugees on the Turkish border fleeing Syria. But then that's in Turkey - far away and out of sight. Calais is far too close to witness a UNHCR tented camp spring up - that would be admitting we actually have a problem - far too close to home!
I'm fully aware of passport, visa and freedom of movement regulations around the world and don't need condescending and pompous lessons in their application. I couldn't give a stuff about them - these people are fleeing unimaginable horrors - I for one am not going to ask to see their bloody passport and tell them they are not allowed in because they are not European!
Simon answered Doreen’s post by asking if she had had her background checked before moving to France. I was pointing out that she did not have to, her situation is not the same as a non European migrant.
Simon also implied that as wealthy Europeans we had special favours. My point was, yes, in Europe we do. Elsewhere we do not. It was Simon who compared Europeans settling in another country to migrants fleeing their non European countries. I was just explaining that that is not a valid comparison. He replied, as usual, with pathetic insults.
I have plenty of spades if he wants to borrow one, not that he needs it, it’s him that’s already in a hole.
All I have done is to point out that you have made an irrelevant point Si. I would not expect you to realise that even you can get things wrong. Spectrum?
Peter no probs. The ‘purile’ comparison was born out of someone else’s take on global passport requirements! 
Does anyone have a larger spade for Johnny please?
Sorry, I was referring to John Brians last two posts but I didn't realise my comments followed yours Simon. next time i'll try to put an @ to whom it concerns..
Saying that the comparison between the 'jolly jaunt' and the migration due to persecution is a bit purile.
I can't see why a 'reasonably wealthy, white european' etc has anything to do with anything. I would hope I, as a relatively poor white european would have the same rights as any other european citizen.
That’s a very different point to the comparison that you made earlier!
Agreed Doreen but…so what about their background ??? - did anyone check out your or my background before we came to live in France? well did they?..
Your words. Nobody had to check Doreen’s background when she moved to France as she is perfectly entitled to do so.
You compared Doreen moving to France with migrants in Calais. They are not the same thing. You love telling people who say anything that disagrees with your precise point of view that they are missing the point. In this case that’s you. Which part of the spectrum are you on?
I swear I wrote it!
Depends on what you mean by legally. Most of the population of the USA, Canada, Australia and NZ could be regarded as being there illegally.
Until the start of the 20th century, there weren't many legal restrictions on where people could go to live and work. But we looted other people's resources and turned their land into battlegrounds and now we make laws to stop them from coming to share a little of our ill-gotten wealth.
Sure Peter…I think there’s a subtle (!) difference between a jolly jaunt by a European to Disneyland Florida, Niagara Falls, The Taj Mahal or the Great Barrier Reef and…non Europeans fleeing wars, persecution, torture, rape and almost certain death. I don’t really think passports and visas come into it!
I had a mindless conversation earlier today with a complete plonker who suggested the migrant boats in the Med should be turned around and sent back - job done! When I pointed out that would almost certainly mean death for many of those on board - he (the plonker) simply shrugged his shoulders and said ‘so be it’. Heck of a world eh? I wonder if one day he may be fleeing war or persecution and be looking for somewhere to run to? No one would have him…
Surprised you needed to ask…