But we’re not talking about refugees. Asylum seekers have found asylum in the first safe country they get to. After that it’s their preference where they go apparently. It’s interesting that after travelling through Italy, France, Germany, Holland or wherever else that so many risk life and limb to get to the racist hell which is Britain.

How strange that we allow or seemingly allow men who are of fighting age the benefit of the doubt to stay in the country indefinitely, with probably a few very bad apples probably thrown out as a PR exercise? & yet we are unable to accept a few (probably a 100 or so) Afghanistani interpreters who worked for the coalition forces.
Now the word Hero is bandied about like confetti nowadays but these guys have risked their & their families lives yet we can't grant them asylum what an absolute travesty.
The same I may add can be said about the Gurkhas what an absolute disgrace.

Pro USA & Israel

How many times Dan, the majority are not refugees, they are economic migrants. I do have some experience in dealing personally with these people, not what I read in the Guardian

Damn right I would not. Running let's you fight another day on the streets. It doesn't give the same benefit with an invasion.

I’m literally only talking about refugees.

Are you?