@robroy im interested were these hotels that they put them in places tourists could stay or were they made up warehouses or abandoned buildings and the like
2 city hotels.
One a popular venue for weddings etc.
There was a rooftop demonstration last yearâŚapparentlly the facilities were not good enough !! 
I alone know of 2 weddings where one of the venues cancelled them in favour of these scroungers.
Now I know businesses have to make money and this was an easy and profitable buck for them, but now these lot have been cleaned out, I sincerely hope the locals boycott them for wedding venues etc.
is they chose to house them then they deserve to loose their business greedy so and soâs
The hotels are still owned by the same owners, but none of the facilities are available, nor the same menu options.
Quite often the furniture is removed and bunks fitted to increase the head count and therefore ownerâs income. It seems quite a money spinner for all involved. The cynic in me says it is a deliberately created situation to repay party donors.
IF it is so why not?..(the basic standards not the donors btw,) but I still dont buy it whatever anyway.
As I said there was actually a rooftop protest at one of our hotels, they were not suited with the standards they were getting for free 
.
Are you suggesting the protest was because the comfy leather chairs had been removed from the lounge, the feather beds had been replaced by bunks, and the âa la carteâ menu had been taken off the table ?
They should consider themselves lucky if they were put in nissen huts sleeping on straw with basic sustinence like bread and water ffs.
There was a video doing the rounds a while back,.a group of ex military guys filming in a hotel while these all young men were queing for their meals with a choice of menu, and the facilities certainly looked a few stars up from âbasicââŚ
The comparison was made with ex services Afghan and Gulf war vets with PTSD etc, and on the streets homeless and penniless while these â â â â s lived in the lap of luxury.
One used to sit outside our Caffe Nero, when I was in I always took him a coffee out, he may be a con man who knows ? But I always gave him the benefit of the doubt,.and listen to what he told me about serving in Afghan etc.
There is also a site on you tube, âRed Roseâ or âWhite Roseâ or summet, dedicated to a group who go around filming these hotels, who are incidentally always stopped filming by security bods, or the Police respond on full blues and twos in record response time,.as if some top secret installation was being breached.
I wonder why that is exactly â â ..(In a âI know why reallyâ stylee btw.)
(Ffs 2 punctuational question marks are now censored on here it seems 
)
You make a good point there i wonder how many of these hotels that kicked guests out and canceled their big dayâs would open their door to a homeless person when its the off peak season and the shelters are full
Following on from my o/p on this, it seems this guyâs vid I put up has gone almost viral.
Somebody finally speaking out publicly, about the sort of stuff I have been seeing for months and posting about on here.
I even put up a pic of one of these scrotes on another thread, a pic taken by my 24 year old daughter after this guy was following her in the street.
No doubt this guy will be written off as a âracistâ or a âright wing troublemakerâ by the usual suspects, but he is just doing what I do, ignoring what we are told about these people, and the b/s we are told to think,.and stating the alternative and REAL view he actually SEES for himself.
He could be the Southern version of ME in factâŚalthough older and less good looking
Upshot is if these individuals must make for here, never mind bloody processing them, never mind providing for them, if they cant behave in a civilised way in OUR country, deport them !
Any political party brave enough to take this hard line, would get in tomorrow in my viewâŚunfortunately there is no such viable party.
Im not saying that shouldnât be the case, other than people making themself rich off the public purse. I just meant it isnât living the life of luxury portrayed by many online.
OkâŚ
It maybe aint a life of luxury maybe by our standards granted.
But as the name suggests (forget the âasylum seekerâ b/s they are ECONOMIC migrants ! ) they will more than likely have been living at home in some sh hole.
Then⌠after living rough for however long, making their way in a dinghy on a rough sea, then getting dried and fed, clothed, a free hotel with a nice clean room, with a warm comfy bed, free meals, free medical care, an allowance to spendâŚand as in my town a brand new fickin bike to get around on.
Well in my book in comparisonâŚThat is sure as hell ââLiving the life of luxuryââ.
The rwanda bill will only stop a few people coming
It will increase undocumented people who wonât declare themselves unless they are genuine.
They will find new ways to enter, it might save a few million quid but you will have more of the same undocumented people all over the country
Can or will they send everyone they can, will they send women and kids
There is always a loop hole
Itâs a good idea to temporary sort a problem and to be seen to be doing something
It needs sorting nearer to home properly with the eu
^^^^^^
I aint fully on board with the Rwanda thing tbh, but if it acts as some kind of deterrent bring it on.
Better to sort the cause of the disease rather than the effectsâŚtake a hard line on the traffickers in no uncertain terms, as you would with a terrorist group or threat.
As for âundocumented peopleâ so what:?
We aint dealing properly with the imported dregs and criminals here alreadyâŚSo what is the difference?
Most of the undocumented people here at the moment have some kind of connection to someone here
Its the ones who donât that would be worrying
Lots of people are completely or wilfully mistaking the whole point of this Rwanda thing and theyâll happily parrot that itâll cost ÂŁx over x number of years while missing the point totally.
If you have a savage guard dog on your premises then perhaps the first burglar will come but I doubt many more will come after that.
It can already be seen that since the bill was passed Ireland has suffered a massive influx of illegal migrants.
If you donât see that then itâs simply because you donât want to.
1 Like
The first week of roundups of asylum seekers for Rwanda has not acted as the deterrent the government hoped for.
Small boat crossings, with 1,420 people crossing in the last seven days up to Sunday. The figure includes the highest daily total so far this year with 711 crossing last Wednesday.
They must be all looking to go to rwanda
Or is it they know that they canât send everyone
Hundreds on the run and hiding, they will get desperate at some stage then god knows what they will do
I prefer to keep my language unemotional and away from rhetoric. Legally they are asylum seekers, and this is backed up by the high percentage of successful claims (76% for year ending '22)
And the definition of asylum is
As I understand it, it is meant as a deterrent.
No one in Gov has said that all asylum seekers will be sent to Rwanda. Only a small number will.
So, given that many are willing to risk their lives in small overcrowded boats, is a small chance of ending up in Rwanda going to deter them from attempting a crossing? The Home Office has offered no evidence of this, although politicians, not noted for being honest or accurate, shout loudly about it.
Rwanda is not âa savage dogâ. Listen to those same politicos and they will explain how it is next to paradise! Where is the deterrent effect?
An increase in Eire asylum seeker figures? Yes.
Also an increase in UK and French and other Euro figures.
The Eire increase may be sharper than that of other countries, and it may even be due to a small or a large effect of Rwanda.
But since there has not been any decrease in UK claimsâŚthe scheme is not doing much good, but is costing a lot of money.
Money that could probably be better spent on less headline grabbing schemes, such as processing asylum seekers in Calais, hence allowing for rapid deportation if unsuccessful seekers boat in, and removing the warehousing of seekers in UK hotels, and ruining the smugglers business models.
Yeah?
Well I prefer to be more of a realist, and to not believe what I am told by those with an agenda, even more so when I SEE the direct opposite to what âtheyâ tell meâŚ(and Iâm especially made more suspicious when I am attempted to be convinced or persuaded by the use of statistics as ââproofââ.)
But do believe, seemingly without any doubt, what some old bloke says on YT about how he overheard a conversation on the other side of the street, was a knight in shining armour, and knew instantly the immigration status of strangers.
You also seem to be a fan of âYorkshire Roseâ? Who alleges that one hostel has a budget of thousands just for sweets for Afghan asylum seekers and that most of them have new cars and Rolex watches! I looked at the Gateshead video, and a few others.
4:24
Iâve just had a message today so I went
4:27
from a local
4:29
gentlemen to say that he
4:32
is worked in b
4:36
in the holiday
4:37
Inn at gaffeth as a kitchen manager
4:42
and he was disgusted to see what the
4:44
Afghan refugees got he had 10 000 pounds
4:48
a week to spend on food and sweets and
4:51
chocolate and pop for them
4:54
he says thereâs so much money of their
4:56
own theyâre walking about in Rolex
4:57
watches driving new cars while people
Citizen Reporter/Drama Queen.