Reuters on immigrants

[Sprotyrover]

Italy says migrants must go to charity boats' home nations
By Crispian Balmer
September 29, 20234:29 PM GMT+1Updated 2 days ago
The Italian Government has kicked off claiming that as the German Government is sponsoring no less than 8 non Government organisations to fund rescue ships in the Mediterranean, Germany should be the country that accepts them not Italy.

[SydneyRover]

I find it more than a bit sad that in one of the richest countries in the world, some seek to use immigration and refugees to score political points when a great deal of Britain's wealth was built on the back of the kidnap, transport, trade and enslavement of people mainly from Africa. Britain a proud country whose kings and Queens of the past had direct involvement in the slave trade and increased their wealth from it. Control of slaves of course was carried out under the threat of brutal punishment that included whipping, rape and murder.

[drfchound]

I find it more than a bit sad that in one of the richest countries in the world, some seek to use immigration and refugees to score political points when a great deal of Britain's wealth was built on the back of the kidnap, transport, trade and enslavement of people mainly from Africa. Britain a proud country whose kings and Queens of the past had direct involvement in the slave trade and increased their wealth from it. Control of slaves of course was carried out under the threat of brutal punishment that included whipping, rape and murder.

And this has relevance to the OP because……?

[SydneyRover]

I find it more than a bit sad that in one of the richest countries in the world, some seek to use immigration and refugees to score political points when a great deal of Britain's wealth was built on the back of the kidnap, transport, trade and enslavement of people mainly from Africa. Britain a proud country whose kings and Queens of the past had direct involvement in the slave trade and increased their wealth from it. Control of slaves of course was carried out under the threat of brutal punishment that included whipping, rape and murder.

And this has relevance to the OP because……?

Refugees want to come here precisely because Britain has wealth and also to link up with their families that came here and helped build Britain, I thought even you could see that hound, but as your question shows you can't.

[SydneyRover]

Here you go hound, this is the beginnings of how Britain became a rich nation, if you have more questions sprot is a bit of a buff apparently.

Historic England

''The first slavers'' (England)

John Lok is the first recorded Englishman to have taken enslaved people from Africa. In 1555 he brought five enslaved people from Guinea to England. William Towerson, a London trader, also captured people to be enslaved during his voyages from Plymouth to Africa between 1556 and 1557.

Despite the earlier involvement of Lok and Towerson, John Hawkins (from 1532 to 1595) of Plymouth is acknowledged as the pioneer of the English slave trade.

From 1562 onwards he made three voyages to Sierra Leone from where he transported 1,200 inhabitants to Hispaniola and St Domingue - present day Dominican Republic and Haiti. Hawkins' voyages were the beginnings of the triangular slave trade between England, Africa and the New World of the Caribbean and Americas'' .................

.............. ''Triangular slave trade
The triangular trade worked to maximise profits. English goods were traded in Africa, from where enslaved people were carried on the infamous middle passage across the Atlantic to the Caribbean and America. Goods produced in the New World were transported back to England. As Britain acquired more colonies in America and the Caribbean, so demand for enslaved Africans to cultivate and harvest the tobacco, rice, sugar and other plantation crops grew.

English involvement in the slave trade intensified after 1663, when a new patent, along with royal backing, was issued to the Company of Royal Adventurers. Succeeded in 1672 by the Royal African Company (RAC), again it received royal backing, particularly from the Duke of York, later King James II''

https://historicengland.org.uk/research/inclusive-heritage/the-slave-trade-and-abolition/sites-of-memory/slave-traders-and-plantation-wealth/britain-and-the-slave-trade/#:~:text=William%20Towerson%2C%20a%20London%20trader,of%20the%20English%20slave%20trade.

 

[SydneyRover]

By the way hound, you don't have to feel guilty, I'm not suggesting that those alive now are responsible for what happened in the past, Britain was far from alone in doing this, but at least recognise Britain's role in world affairs.

[ncRover]

I find it more than a bit sad that in one of the richest countries in the world, some seek to use immigration and refugees to score political points when a great deal of Britain's wealth was built on the back of the kidnap, transport, trade and enslavement of people mainly from Africa. Britain a proud country whose kings and Queens of the past had direct involvement in the slave trade and increased their wealth from it. Control of slaves of course was carried out under the threat of brutal punishment that included whipping, rape and murder.

And this has relevance to the OP because……?

Refugees want to come here precisely because Britain has wealth and also to link up with their families that came here and helped build Britain, I thought even you could see that hound, but as your question shows you can't.

I thought Britain was a poverty-stricken hell scape in which wealth was only accessible to the upper echelons of society?

*im very much pro-immigration btw

[SydneyRover]

It is for a lot of people nc, as you and others keep being reminded it's the distribution of it (wealth ) that's the problem.

[SydneyRover]

If one looks at a map of the old empire and then the commonwealth you can see that we, our forebears took our version of government around the world i(n competition with other nations ) whether the recipients of it liked it or not. There needs to a better response to the way we and other nations treat refugees for whatever the reasons they leave their homelands.

Treating refugees as a convenient tool for retaining government is not working and inhumane, look no further than Oz's reputation.

[ncRover]

I’m all for taking in people feeling war and terrorism.

And for giving people the chance to come here to improve their lives and help contribute to this country if they want to.

But if the UK is such an unequal society, why do economic migrants (generally not well off to start with) choose to come here over other countries to improve their lives? Surely if it’s so unequal they would choose somewhere else?

I also fail to see how the slave trade and commonwealth is relevant to your argument either in the present day.

The top 2 countries from which people claimed asylum in 2021 and 2022 were Albania and Afghanistan.

Are they linking up with their families that helped to build the wealth of Britain?

[SydneyRover]

I’m all for taking in people feeling war and terrorism.

And for giving people the chance to come here to improve their lives and help contribute to this country if they want to.

But if the UK is such an unequal society, why do economic migrants (generally not well off to start with) choose to come here over other countries to improve their lives? Surely if it’s so unequal they would choose somewhere else?

I also fail to see how the slave trade and commonwealth is relevant to your argument either in the present day.

The top 2 countries from which people claimed asylum in 2021 and 2022 were Albania and Afghanistan.

Are they linking up with their families that helped to build the wealth of Britain?

All the government needs to do which has been said on off topic many times is to speed up the processing, accept genuine refugees around 60% and process the others in a humane way. The government needs long queues to use as red meat.

The slave trade and the circular trade is how Britain got rich and continued to expand the empire many countries where Britain control or had fingers in are where many problems still remain. If you think they enjoyed Britain's rule check how many opt for self rule when given a choice.

If you cannot see why those from poorer countries head for richer countries then there is not a lot of point debating this with you aye?

Think back to T May. Britain fought Spain and took over a lot of the West Indies and expanded the slave trade into there, then when we need people to help out we invite some of those here to help (50s and 60s) and only those that can afford to travel. Then the party you are so defensive about decide to adopt hostile policies to deport them (for political reasons) and because they were not afforded the correct paperwork at the time and even though they were legitimate citizens. The government by the way has not completed all the compensation claims.

[DRFC_AjA]

Here you go hound, this is the beginnings of how Britain became a rich nation, if you have more questions sprot is a bit of a buff apparently.

Historic England

''The first slavers'' (England)

John Lok is the first recorded Englishman to have taken enslaved people from Africa. In 1555 he brought five enslaved people from Guinea to England. William Towerson, a London trader, also captured people to be enslaved during his voyages from Plymouth to Africa between 1556 and 1557.

Despite the earlier involvement of Lok and Towerson, John Hawkins (from 1532 to 1595) of Plymouth is acknowledged as the pioneer of the English slave trade.

From 1562 onwards he made three voyages to Sierra Leone from where he transported 1,200 inhabitants to Hispaniola and St Domingue - present day Dominican Republic and Haiti. Hawkins' voyages were the beginnings of the triangular slave trade between England, Africa and the New World of the Caribbean and Americas'' .................

.............. ''Triangular slave trade
The triangular trade worked to maximise profits. English goods were traded in Africa, from where enslaved people were carried on the infamous middle passage across the Atlantic to the Caribbean and America. Goods produced in the New World were transported back to England. As Britain acquired more colonies in America and the Caribbean, so demand for enslaved Africans to cultivate and harvest the tobacco, rice, sugar and other plantation crops grew.

English involvement in the slave trade intensified after 1663, when a new patent, along with royal backing, was issued to the Company of Royal Adventurers. Succeeded in 1672 by the Royal African Company (RAC), again it received royal backing, particularly from the Duke of York, later King James II''

https://historicengland.org.uk/research/inclusive-heritage/the-slave-trade-and-abolition/sites-of-memory/slave-traders-and-plantation-wealth/britain-and-the-slave-trade/#:~:text=William%20Towerson%2C%20a%20London%20trader,of%20the%20English%20slave%20trade.

Fantastic history lesson but totally irrelevant to today. This apparently rich nation has homelessness in every town, single mums living in bedsits because there's no room, an epidemic of shoplifting due to poverty.  Regardless of who is to blame for that list the simple question is why import more poverty? The myth that's its women and children when in actuality its young able bodies males is hilarious too

And I'm still waiting for my reparations from the Ottoman empire who enslaved white Europeans. Despite statically not being a descendant of a slave I want people who statistically are not descendants of slave owners to gimme some dosh because I'm a victim

[SydneyRover]

It is for a lot of people nc, as you and others keep being reminded it's the distribution of it (wealth ) that's the problem.

you missed this bit

[drfchound]

I find it more than a bit sad that in one of the richest countries in the world, some seek to use immigration and refugees to score political points when a great deal of Britain's wealth was built on the back of the kidnap, transport, trade and enslavement of people mainly from Africa. Britain a proud country whose kings and Queens of the past had direct involvement in the slave trade and increased their wealth from it. Control of slaves of course was carried out under the threat of brutal punishment that included whipping, rape and murder.

And this has relevance to the OP because……?

I find it more than a bit sad that in one of the richest countries in the world, some seek to use immigration and refugees to score political points when a great deal of Britain's wealth was built on the back of the kidnap, transport, trade and enslavement of people mainly from Africa. Britain a proud country whose kings and Queens of the past had direct involvement in the slave trade and increased their wealth from it. Control of slaves of course was carried out under the threat of brutal punishment that included whipping, rape and murder.

And this has relevance to the OP because……?

Refugees want to come here precisely because Britain has wealth and also to link up with their families that came here and helped build Britain, I thought even you could see that hound, but as your question shows you can't.

Here you go hound, this is the beginnings of how Britain became a rich nation, if you have more questions sprot is a bit of a buff apparently.

Historic England

''The first slavers'' (England)

John Lok is the first recorded Englishman to have taken enslaved people from Africa. In 1555 he brought five enslaved people from Guinea to England. William Towerson, a London trader, also captured people to be enslaved during his voyages from Plymouth to Africa between 1556 and 1557.

Despite the earlier involvement of Lok and Towerson, John Hawkins (from 1532 to 1595) of Plymouth is acknowledged as the pioneer of the English slave trade.

From 1562 onwards he made three voyages to Sierra Leone from where he transported 1,200 inhabitants to Hispaniola and St Domingue - present day Dominican Republic and Haiti. Hawkins' voyages were the beginnings of the triangular slave trade between England, Africa and the New World of the Caribbean and Americas'' .................

.............. ''Triangular slave trade
The triangular trade worked to maximise profits. English goods were traded in Africa, from where enslaved people were carried on the infamous middle passage across the Atlantic to the Caribbean and America. Goods produced in the New World were transported back to England. As Britain acquired more colonies in America and the Caribbean, so demand for enslaved Africans to cultivate and harvest the tobacco, rice, sugar and other plantation crops grew.

English involvement in the slave trade intensified after 1663, when a new patent, along with royal backing, was issued to the Company of Royal Adventurers. Succeeded in 1672 by the Royal African Company (RAC), again it received royal backing, particularly from the Duke of York, later King James II''

https://historicengland.org.uk/research/inclusive-heritage/the-slave-trade-and-abolition/sites-of-memory/slave-traders-and-plantation-wealth/britain-and-the-slave-trade/#:~:text=William%20Towerson%2C%20a%20London%20trader,of%20the%20English%20slave%20trade.

 

By the way hound, you don't have to feel guilty, I'm not suggesting that those alive now are responsible for what happened in the past, Britain was far from alone in doing this, but at least recognise Britain's role in world affairs.

Syd, thanks for all that information, most of which I knew about anyway, but you have gone off at a complete tangent.
This thread is about Italy and Germany having a bit of a fall out.
If you want to discuss our (the UK’s) situation go and start a new thread about it.

 

[selby]

  Why Italy don't turn them right instead of left towards the Balkans and Russia I don't know.
   Russia is wanting volunteers at the moment especially young men.

[Sprotyrover]

Thanks Syd you have missed out Sir Francis Drake, what was the name of his ship when he went slaving?

[SydneyRover]

Thanks Syd you have missed out Sir Francis Drake, what was the name of his ship when he went slaving?

A pleasure sprot, you didn't say whether you agreed with Germany sponsoring the rescue of people in trouble?

[ravenrover]

Thanks Syd you have missed out Sir Francis Drake, what was the name of his ship when he went slaving?

As you will see from this article Drake went under the command of John Hawkins on his slave trading expeditions. It would more correct to say he was part of the Slave Trade and played only a minor part.
https://www.goldenhinde.co.uk/blog/278-drake-was-a-slave-trader

Not condoning The Slave Trade by the way.

[Sprotyrover]

Thanks Syd you have missed out Sir Francis Drake, what was the name of his ship when he went slaving?

As you will see from this article Drake went under the command of John Hawkins on his slave trading expeditions. It would more correct to say he was part of the Slave Trade and played only a minor part.

Not condoning The Slave Trade by the way.

Drake went slaving what was the name of the ship?

[Sprotyrover]

Thanks Syd you have missed out Sir Francis Drake, what was the name of his ship when he went slaving?

A pleasure sprot, you didn't say whether you agreed with Germany sponsoring the rescue of people in trouble?

They can please themselves but they need to be landing them on German Soil and absorbing them into German society not pushing them on to less wealthy countries which already are struggling to cope with a massive migrant problem. (A bit like the UK and France by the way.
Now get the history books out and name the ship?

[ravenrover]

Thanks Syd you have missed out Sir Francis Drake, what was the name of his ship when he went slaving?

As you will see from this article Drake went under the command of John Hawkins on his slave trading expeditions. It would more correct to say he was part of the Slave Trade and played only a minor part.

Not condoning The Slave Trade by the way.

Drake went slaving what was the name of the ship?

Corrected my post forgot to put the link
The answer, maybe not the one you are thinking, is The Judith
 If you were thinking Golden Hinde that was a rename of his ship  The Pelican on his circumnavigation voyage

[Sprotyrover]

Thanks Syd you have missed out Sir Francis Drake, what was the name of his ship when he went slaving?

As you will see from this article Drake went under the command of John Hawkins on his slave trading expeditions. It would more correct to say he was part of the Slave Trade and played only a minor part.

Not condoning The Slave Trade by the way.

Drake went slaving what was the name of the ship?

Corrected my post forgot to put the link
The answer, maybe not the one you are thinking, is The Judith
 If you were thinking Golden Hinde that was a rename of his ship  The Pelican on his circumnavigation voyage

No sorry Raven, leave it to Sydders to nip  to a reference library it will do him good, he will have to take notes not cut and paste!

[ravenrover]

But you asked me the same question? Which I did in fact know, the cut and paste was to give some background

[SydneyRover]

Thanks Syd you have missed out Sir Francis Drake, what was the name of his ship when he went slaving?

A pleasure sprot, you didn't say whether you agreed with Germany sponsoring the rescue of people in trouble?

They can please themselves but they need to be landing them on German Soil and absorbing them into German society not pushing them on to less wealthy countries which already are struggling to cope with a massive migrant problem. (A bit like the UK and France by the way.
Now get the history books out and name the ship?

So you are making the rescue of people in danger conditional, do I understand you correctly that people should be allowed to drown if Germany doesn't agree to that?

[Sprotyrover]

Thanks Syd you have missed out Sir Francis Drake, what was the name of his ship when he went slaving?

A pleasure sprot, you didn't say whether you agreed with Germany sponsoring the rescue of people in trouble?

They can please themselves but they need to be landing them on German Soil and absorbing them into German society not pushing them on to less wealthy countries which already are struggling to cope with a massive migrant problem. (A bit like the UK and France by the way.
Now get the history books out and name the ship?

So you are making the rescue of people in danger conditional, do I understand you correctly that people should be allowed to drown if Germany doesn't agree to that?

The name of Drakes ship please.

[SydneyRover]

which is more important buff your history test or saving the lives of people, sprot?

[Sprotyrover]

 there are 8 German funded ships operating in the Med South of Italy ‘Rescuing’ thousands of military age males who have voluntarily boarded a Dinghy or Fishing boat in an attempt to get to Italy, it’s not as if they have been swept out to sea whilst messing about on a paddle board is it?
They have put themselves in danger to get into Europe illegally. If they want to claim asylum they can do so from North Africa where they are currently based.

[SydneyRover]

Sprot, are you suggesting that during rescue at sea those in danger would have to be questioned and their identity and status determined before being pulled into the boat?

[drfchound]

I’m sure he didn’t suggest that Syd.

[Sprotyrover]

Sprot, are you suggesting that during rescue at sea those in danger would have to be questioned and their identity and status determined before being pulled into the boat?

The Boats should not be there in the first place , their presence if encouraging folks to jump into un seaworthy Vessels and commit criminal acts, they are not Asylum seekers they are illegal immigrants!