My cock is floppy and ugly but you wouldn't want a picture of that slapped on here without a tag. But that's life, I have repugnant flap of meat drooping out of my pelvis.

Disagree. Sadly, its life.

That's a weak argument; all sorts of things are 'life' but having them front and centre as someone scrolls through a thread wouldn't be on. I personally don't mind but I support anyone who doesn't necessarily want to see dead children on Beex. A spoiler tag with a comment is trivial to do here and if you want to post an image of an actual dead person I'd be very surprised if it was considered too much to ask.

No-one wanted to see Michael Buerk reporting on emaciated virtual corpses walking round africa when they were eating their tea. But they saw them.

The world changed as a result. The problem didn't get solved overnight, but attitudes (looking beyond our own doorstep, and our comparatively trivial issues) changed and things improved over time.

Yes, precisely what I've been saying; Blair politely refers to 'a politics of parallel reality in which reason is an irritation, evidence a distraction and emotional impact is king', whereas I, with considerably less tact but with precisely the same basic message refer to 'swivel-eyed loons'. This latest 'movement', if we can call it that, whereby the whole pesky, inconvenient business of empirical efficacy, truth and demonstrable folly of the absurd 'policies' being pursued - whether that be the SNP's White Paper...

The pictured boy is reported to be three-year-old Aylan, who drowned along with his five-year-old brother Galip and their mother, Rihan. Their father, Abdullah Kurdi, survived.

...or Cameron's Daily-Mail-courting anti-immigration policies. Policies that have no grounding in economics, but are carefully designed to appeal to people scared of migrants. Which have been proven, year after year, to be entirely unworkable as immigration has risen time and time again. But the emotional impact -- the popularity of these policies with middle England -- that is undeniable. How is that any different to the policies you are castigating Corbyn for?

It's fucked up that the two pictures of the dead child seem to have completely changed the tabloid narrative from 'dole-seeking cockroaches' to 'humanitarian crisis'.

We're the thousands of other dead people not photogenic enough for the Sun or the Mail?

Exactly that.

Parliament petition link, BTW.

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/105991

No particular objections to the image being put behind a spoiler but I'd take issue with it being described as 'NSFW', this is a picture that's being carried far and wide on news services across the world

[...]in some cases actually having them cached in your browser viewing history might be a bit sensitive if it can be used against you.

NSFW isn't a literal thing as far as I'm concerned, anyway.

So - who'd house one of the immigrant families, if it came to that?

NSFW isn't a literal thing as far as I'm concerned, anyway.

So - who'd house one of the immigrant families, if it came to that?

It should be noted that an image behind a spoiler tag is cached in your browser viewing history, which is why actual NSFW images and videos aren't allowed on Beex at all.

It's the usual hateful tabloid bullshit; as soon as public opinion moves they flip their position so they can always be on the 'right' side of whatever's going on. It's surely only a matter of time before the fucking Sun unveils some vomit inducing 'campaign' (with suitably vague aims) so that if anything at all does change they can do the usual load of hypocritical back slapping while claiming that it was The Sun wot won it. Ugh. The fact that they're so nakedly manipulative yet slack jawed twats keep buying into it really boils my piss.

Exactly that.

...or Cameron's Daily-Mail-courting anti-immigration policies. Policies that have no grounding in economics, but are carefully designed to appeal to people scared of migrants. Which have been proven, year after year, to be entirely unworkable as immigration has risen time and time again. But the emotional impact -- the popularity of these policies with middle England -- that is undeniable. How is that any different to the policies you are castigating Corbyn for?

It's fucked up that the two pictures of the dead child seem to have completely changed the tabloid narrative from 'dole-seeking cockroaches' to 'humanitarian crisis'.

We're the thousands of other dead people not photogenic enough for the Sun or the Mail?

That's not what i'm hearing in local news and commentators. Apparently, at least judging from what I hear, the UK is attractive because it's easier to work illegaly than in France, Germany or Sweden. Because when it comes to benefits, these countries are comparable, or even above, the UK.

And every time i hear your prime minister talk i have to change the channel. I suppose he has this anti-emigration/anti-EU rhetoric as a demagogic way of keeping some of the most far-right electorate, because he's certainly smarter than that. Kudos to Merkel, though. Never liked the lady as she's always meddling in our internal affairs, but she's been having a great attitude lately towards the humaniatian crisis.

On the unspoilered image, I'm with Russ. I know it's weak of me etc. but I find it near impossible to deal with images such as have been described (I haven't looked at them).

I also agree with APOD that they've been posted in the wrong thread - this is a meta UK political issue and it's hardly as though any of the UK political parties has an answer to this, or indeed can have an answer.

My own view? As hard as it is to say - especially since I myself come from immigrant refugee stock (and so is hypocritical as I am acutely aware), I just don't think taking in more of these people is the answer, because if we do, ten times more again will come as a result. I'm sorry, but that's just the harsh reality of it for me.

We need to be concentrating our efforts into humanitarian measures within the actual affected countries.

I don't think anyone disputes that fixing things at source is by far the best option. The fact is though that there are now millions of displaced people and we absolutely have to do something about that. Closing the borders is simply not an option at the moment, as it leads to lots and lots of dead people.

It's not like these are an underclass of layabouts or whatever; the people most likely to be able to get out are the ones who had money in the first instance. They are the doctors, bankers, teachers, etc.

Though that shouldn't make a difference. They aren't fleeing and dying to come here and claim fucking JSA.

Nah, look at comment pages on pretty much any newspaper site; there are a lot of people who think that Syrian refugees are out to steal our monies!

David Cameron needs to remove his head from his arse and do something.

Nah, look at comment pages on pretty much any newspaper site; there are a lot of people who think that Syrian refugees are out to steal our monies!

I just don't think taking in more of these people is the answer, because if we do, ten times more again will come as a result. I'm sorry, but that's just the harsh reality of it for me

We cannot simply stand by and watch all these people die.

Unsurprisingly I agree with Cavey. The bleeding-hearts of the left want the doors open wide to let in everyone, with no thought to logistics, infrastructure, housing, feeding, clothing, translational services, administration, processing - you name it, they haven't thought about it.

It's all very well to stand on the sideline and impotently bemoan the government to DO SOMETHING, but as usual there exists a reality of feasibility that thankfully supersedes blind angry ideological demands.

You think politicians are bastards because they aren't moved by the picture of a face-down dead child. That's precisely why we have politicians - we entrust them to make decisions on behalf of the country on the basis of considered and measured assessment of the REALITY of this country's capabilities. If a politician implemented new policy every time something tugged at their heart strings the country would be in a right fucking mess and nobody would thank them for that.

So, at soon as you can lay out a full plan for how the country can house an unexpected influx of thousands of displaced people given the current limitations of jobs, housing, and existing support services to process them, I'll be more than happy to support it. If you can't, and the whole of your argument is 'Rah rah rah, let them in you heartless bastards!', you won't be getting much support from me.



Sure we fucking can. More people die of other equally tragic causes every day, all over the world. You don't give a flying fuck about that most of the time because it's not pushed under your nose in a national newspaper or website. How is this any different apart from the fact it's a bit nearer than usual?

8)

Rationalising your egoism doesn't make it ethical.

So, at soon as you can lay out a full plan for how the country can house an unexpected influx of thousands of displaced people given the current limitations of jobs, housing, and existing support services to process them, I'll be more than happy to support it. If you can't, and the whole of your argument is 'Rah rah rah, let them in you heartless bastards!', you won't be getting much support from me.

I'm not rationalising anything. Just pointing out the hypocrisy of suddenly demanding our government fix the ills of the world because one particular type is being well-publicised lately.