Post by rjdgull on Nov 2, 2012 0:18:23 GMT
I am pleased to say that we have a new winner this month! 
October certainly got off to a feisty start on here and as happens occasionally, things did get out of hand on a couple of threads which mutated out of all recognition from the OP. Not that is always a bad thing (the mutation!) and when you have quite strong and diverse arguments a lot of voting does go on and when DTG picks up a few (votes, not beach babes ) I think you have always got to sit up and take note! 
I think jamesb needs to be mentioned in dispatches as his score will probably be enough to win more often than not and apart from the general ding dong made some strong arguments about the direction that he wanted to see Ling and the club go which obviously resonated with some members.
The winner this month, is a relatively new member and has been a revelation since he started posting. He certainly has earned his spurs this month crossing seamlessly from the tranquil history and photo rooms to the ding dong of the month! So many congratulations to a founder member of the TFF Socialist Club, the one and only Wildebeest! 
NHS tells doctors: You must treat all foreigners to protect their human rights... but you can still turn away BRITONS
Foreigners must be given free treatment by GPs - it is their human right
New guidelines dictate that doctors must register any foreign patient
Includes asylum seekers, overseas students or tourists on a short holiday
Some GPs are furious, describing changes as a 'charter for health tourism'
Excuse me but these few lines tick all the Mail's boxes: foreigners, human rights, asylum seekers and doctors being dictated to, making some of them (how many?) furious over a "charter for health tourism". Asylum seekers are the Didis of our time and the Mail (and it's less well-written and even more rabid rival the Express even more so) make it clear day after day what they think should happen to them.
This was the main story in the Mail on 29 June:
Soft-touch Britain, the asylum seeker capital of Europe: We let in more than anyone else last year
Britain granted asylum to more people than any other European Union country last year, official figures revealed yesterday.
Some 14,360 immigrants were given asylum within the UK in 2011, compared with 13,045 in the second highest country, Germany, and 10,740 in third placed France.
The figure was the third successive rise in successful claims in the UK and an increase of 41 per cent since 2008.
Critics said the data confirmed that Britain is a soft touch when it comes to granting asylum.
In this example, letting in people who arrive claiming to be fleeing in fear of their lives makes the UK a soft touch. The critics, like the "some doctors" mentioned in today's story, are all unidentified, which makes an old cynic like me suspect that the critics in question are inhabitants of the editorial office.
Those same anonymous critics were also quoted in 2010 when the Supreme Court gave a verdict in favour of not deporting gay asylum seekers:
But critics warned it could lead to the UK - which is among the first nations to take such a position - becoming a leading destination for asylum seekers who are claiming to be gay.
Sir Andrew Green, chairman of Migrationwatch, said: 'This could lead to a potentially massive expansion of asylum claims as it could apply to literally millions of people around the world.
'An applicant has now only to show that he - or she - is homosexual and intends to return and live openly in one of the many countries where it is illegal to be granted asylum in the UK.
When they do look for a real person to make a comment the Mail chooses the chairman of Migrationwatch, a right wing organisation opposed to immigration on principle, just as they so often turn to the Taxpayer's Alliance when they want a rent-a-quote on economic issues. Both organisations, and the newspaper proprietors who support them, exist in a world which runs on intolerance and bigotry.
Here's a nifty selection of today's comments from Mail readers (current first and second pages)
NOW I UNDERSTAND WHY CAMERON IS CUTTING UK WELFARE PAYMENTS-- SO WE CAN LET EVERY SCROUNGER IN THE WORLD GET FREE MEDICAL TREATMENT. HE SHOULD BE ASHAMED OF HIMSELF, BUT IT`S VERY CLEAR HE`S NOT. IT`S BEYOND MY COMPREHENSION WHAT AGENDA THESE m.P.`S ARE PURSUING. NONE OF THEM ARE LIVING IN THE REAL WORLD LIKE US PLEBS. IT`S OK FOR THEM ON A VERY GOOD WAGE ,EXPENSES AND PENSIONS PAID FOR BY, YES IT`S US PLEBS. GET US OUT OF THE EU AS PROMISED IN YOUR ELECTION MANIFESTO. WE KNOW YOU WON`T BECAUSE YOUR NOT A MAN JUST A LYING POLITICIAN. I AM A 70 YEAR OLD PENSIONER(STILL PAYING INCOME TAX) WHO HAS VOTED TORY SINCE I WAS 18. NOT ANYMORE AND I HOPE ALL PENSIONERS AND THE MAJORITY OF UK VOTERS DO THE SAME. SO BOG OF CAMERON AND YOUR MOTLYCREW OR WORDS TO THAT EFFECT.
Your better off being a immigrant in this Country free NHS treatment, Free housing plus benefits yet it,s us mugs the taxpayer copping out and paying for it all, we would not get all this in another Country so why should have put up with it.We are treated with contempt we have heating bill,s going up but no help for those that that need it. Yet the Government give millions away on foriegn aid to Countries that are better off than, us where is the justice in that
Its time all those politically correct idiots who are in government or places of power where decisions are made that can affect others were actually moved out of the positions they hold and someone who can do the job was put in I can support anyone who takes ill on holiday having to be seen and treated (they will have insurance after all, if not then they pay up front just as we would have to in their country) but those who come purely to use our health system then the answer is no unless they have the money to pay then i am sorry send them back to where they came from i dont care about their rights i care about the rights of those citizens who have paid for the NHS all their lives and they cant get seen because a foreigner is given treatment before them, get it sorted or give the job to someone who will sort it
Highly annoyed after reading this here - still this shouldn't come as a surprise, another thing that made me shake my head was today I called into Costcutters for something on my way home after being out cycling, and what caught my eye was the headline on another newspaper more or less stating that the the EU are going to be given more powers to asylum seekers to come here and claim benefits. Earlier this week George Osborne announced that another £10 billion or whatever the figure was needs to be saved by cutting people's benefits, so how come people entering the UK can claim any money within hours of being here? Then it dawned on me, the cuts to benefits will just apply to UK residents born and bred here. While those from outside the UK will be given a house and other generous benefits for doing diddly squat,
I am going to stop now because my keyboard is getting tired of such ignorant nonsense (i am sorry send them back to where they came from i don't care about their rights speaks for itself, don't you think?) but before I do, and to show that not everyone who reads the Mail is a rampant fascist hyena, this comment comes from a reader in Exeter:
This is NOT true. Facts: -EU citizens must have been resident and/or working in the UK for a minimum of 30 days before they are granted a GP. Other EU nationals only can seek treatment of pre-existing or emergency conditions. 11 non-EU states, mostly British outposts in the Caribbean, have reciprocal health agreements which treat them the same. -Non-EU citizens who have lived legally in the UK for greater than one year have access to the NHS. As it is NOT POSSIBLE for non-EU citizens to claim benefits unless they have been granted indefinite leave to remain, so they would have been paying taxes. -Asylum seekers with approved or pending applications receive free prescriptions. No other non-UK resident does, unless they carry a communicable disease that threatens public health (ie TB, malaria etc). Full stop. Any GP can use discretion to give free care. There are certainly flaws with the system, but spreading lies about it is not going to solve those things that actually need fixing.
A sensible opinion, grammatically correct, non-abusive and well expressed. Must be a liberal, dammit!
October certainly got off to a feisty start on here and as happens occasionally, things did get out of hand on a couple of threads which mutated out of all recognition from the OP. Not that is always a bad thing (the mutation!
) and when you have quite strong and diverse arguments a lot of voting does go on and when DTG picks up a few (votes, not beach babes ) I think you have always got to sit up and take note! 
I think jamesb needs to be mentioned in dispatches as his score will probably be enough to win more often than not and apart from the general ding dong made some strong arguments about the direction that he wanted to see Ling and the club go which obviously resonated with some members.
The winner this month, is a relatively new member and has been a revelation since he started posting. He certainly has earned his spurs this month crossing seamlessly from the tranquil history and photo rooms to the ding dong of the month!
So many congratulations to a founder member of the TFF Socialist Club, the one and only Wildebeest! 
Oct 13, 2012 15:08:56 GMT @wildebeeste said:
This is the headline in question:NHS tells doctors: You must treat all foreigners to protect their human rights... but you can still turn away BRITONS
Foreigners must be given free treatment by GPs - it is their human right
New guidelines dictate that doctors must register any foreign patient
Includes asylum seekers, overseas students or tourists on a short holiday
Some GPs are furious, describing changes as a 'charter for health tourism'
Excuse me but these few lines tick all the Mail's boxes: foreigners, human rights, asylum seekers and doctors being dictated to, making some of them (how many?) furious over a "charter for health tourism". Asylum seekers are the Didis of our time and the Mail (and it's less well-written and even more rabid rival the Express even more so) make it clear day after day what they think should happen to them.
This was the main story in the Mail on 29 June:
Soft-touch Britain, the asylum seeker capital of Europe: We let in more than anyone else last year
Britain granted asylum to more people than any other European Union country last year, official figures revealed yesterday.
Some 14,360 immigrants were given asylum within the UK in 2011, compared with 13,045 in the second highest country, Germany, and 10,740 in third placed France.
The figure was the third successive rise in successful claims in the UK and an increase of 41 per cent since 2008.
Critics said the data confirmed that Britain is a soft touch when it comes to granting asylum.
In this example, letting in people who arrive claiming to be fleeing in fear of their lives makes the UK a soft touch. The critics, like the "some doctors" mentioned in today's story, are all unidentified, which makes an old cynic like me suspect that the critics in question are inhabitants of the editorial office.
Those same anonymous critics were also quoted in 2010 when the Supreme Court gave a verdict in favour of not deporting gay asylum seekers:
But critics warned it could lead to the UK - which is among the first nations to take such a position - becoming a leading destination for asylum seekers who are claiming to be gay.
Sir Andrew Green, chairman of Migrationwatch, said: 'This could lead to a potentially massive expansion of asylum claims as it could apply to literally millions of people around the world.
'An applicant has now only to show that he - or she - is homosexual and intends to return and live openly in one of the many countries where it is illegal to be granted asylum in the UK.
When they do look for a real person to make a comment the Mail chooses the chairman of Migrationwatch, a right wing organisation opposed to immigration on principle, just as they so often turn to the Taxpayer's Alliance when they want a rent-a-quote on economic issues. Both organisations, and the newspaper proprietors who support them, exist in a world which runs on intolerance and bigotry.
Here's a nifty selection of today's comments from Mail readers (current first and second pages)
NOW I UNDERSTAND WHY CAMERON IS CUTTING UK WELFARE PAYMENTS-- SO WE CAN LET EVERY SCROUNGER IN THE WORLD GET FREE MEDICAL TREATMENT. HE SHOULD BE ASHAMED OF HIMSELF, BUT IT`S VERY CLEAR HE`S NOT. IT`S BEYOND MY COMPREHENSION WHAT AGENDA THESE m.P.`S ARE PURSUING. NONE OF THEM ARE LIVING IN THE REAL WORLD LIKE US PLEBS. IT`S OK FOR THEM ON A VERY GOOD WAGE ,EXPENSES AND PENSIONS PAID FOR BY, YES IT`S US PLEBS. GET US OUT OF THE EU AS PROMISED IN YOUR ELECTION MANIFESTO. WE KNOW YOU WON`T BECAUSE YOUR NOT A MAN JUST A LYING POLITICIAN. I AM A 70 YEAR OLD PENSIONER(STILL PAYING INCOME TAX) WHO HAS VOTED TORY SINCE I WAS 18. NOT ANYMORE AND I HOPE ALL PENSIONERS AND THE MAJORITY OF UK VOTERS DO THE SAME. SO BOG OF CAMERON AND YOUR MOTLYCREW OR WORDS TO THAT EFFECT.
Your better off being a immigrant in this Country free NHS treatment, Free housing plus benefits yet it,s us mugs the taxpayer copping out and paying for it all, we would not get all this in another Country so why should have put up with it.We are treated with contempt we have heating bill,s going up but no help for those that that need it. Yet the Government give millions away on foriegn aid to Countries that are better off than, us where is the justice in that
Its time all those politically correct idiots who are in government or places of power where decisions are made that can affect others were actually moved out of the positions they hold and someone who can do the job was put in I can support anyone who takes ill on holiday having to be seen and treated (they will have insurance after all, if not then they pay up front just as we would have to in their country) but those who come purely to use our health system then the answer is no unless they have the money to pay then i am sorry send them back to where they came from i dont care about their rights i care about the rights of those citizens who have paid for the NHS all their lives and they cant get seen because a foreigner is given treatment before them, get it sorted or give the job to someone who will sort it
Highly annoyed after reading this here - still this shouldn't come as a surprise, another thing that made me shake my head was today I called into Costcutters for something on my way home after being out cycling, and what caught my eye was the headline on another newspaper more or less stating that the the EU are going to be given more powers to asylum seekers to come here and claim benefits. Earlier this week George Osborne announced that another £10 billion or whatever the figure was needs to be saved by cutting people's benefits, so how come people entering the UK can claim any money within hours of being here? Then it dawned on me, the cuts to benefits will just apply to UK residents born and bred here. While those from outside the UK will be given a house and other generous benefits for doing diddly squat,
I am going to stop now because my keyboard is getting tired of such ignorant nonsense (i am sorry send them back to where they came from i don't care about their rights speaks for itself, don't you think?) but before I do, and to show that not everyone who reads the Mail is a rampant fascist hyena, this comment comes from a reader in Exeter:
This is NOT true. Facts: -EU citizens must have been resident and/or working in the UK for a minimum of 30 days before they are granted a GP. Other EU nationals only can seek treatment of pre-existing or emergency conditions. 11 non-EU states, mostly British outposts in the Caribbean, have reciprocal health agreements which treat them the same. -Non-EU citizens who have lived legally in the UK for greater than one year have access to the NHS. As it is NOT POSSIBLE for non-EU citizens to claim benefits unless they have been granted indefinite leave to remain, so they would have been paying taxes. -Asylum seekers with approved or pending applications receive free prescriptions. No other non-UK resident does, unless they carry a communicable disease that threatens public health (ie TB, malaria etc). Full stop. Any GP can use discretion to give free care. There are certainly flaws with the system, but spreading lies about it is not going to solve those things that actually need fixing.
A sensible opinion, grammatically correct, non-abusive and well expressed. Must be a liberal, dammit!
