Police commissioner requests 'immediate review' of decision to ban Maccabi Tel Aviv fans

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dorcus

If Dave 52 has probably worked all his life, paid taxes and funded the NHS why on Earth should he be concerned about the Government feeding and housing immigrants? It's nothing to do with Dave 52.

If Dave 52 has probably worked all his life then he's unlikely to be homeless and he has enough to feed himself at the very least: if he's paid his taxes then he's unlikely to be in trouble with the Revenue and if he's paid into the NHS then hopefully he can get the necessary treatment if he falls ill. Oh and incidentally, receive treatment by many of the immigrants he griping about!!!

It all sounds like sour grapes to me. If Dave 52 honestly believes that stopping funds to immigrants will be diverted back into his pocket then he's sadly deluded. Any savings will inevitably be given away to higher earners as tax breaks. It's not the immigrants that's Dave 52's adversaries, it's the rich elite who milk us for all they can get and control the politics to boot.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Lone Gunman

I can’t. Never really thought about it. But you’ve mentioned illegal immigration frequently. So how do you define it? I’m not talking about a general definition, I’m talking about your personal definition.

To me, the casual, glib way in which people happily describe other people as ‘illegals’ is nauseating.

---

Well seeing as I’ve asked the question, I’ll try and give you my thoughts as clearly as I can without googling or getting a definition from a book.
I honestly wasn’t sure myself as I asked the question, as like yourself, I too have never given it much thought.
Again being honest, the reason the thought entered my head, was the replies from yourself, Birchgrove, Dorcus, Sludge etc appeared to be along the lines of anyone wanting to stop certain migrants from entering the country, or send them back, made you an uninformed bigoted racist. So my natural thought was if you and the others are willing to accept absolutely anyone entering the country without any documentation, or without good reason, then why have borders and passports? Off the top of my head, I’d say the main reason would be security.
Obviously yrs ago, before planes and trains humans being the curious creatures they are started travelling anywhere in the world that a boat would take them, and settling where ever they wanted and could survive.
That then progressed to larger groups travelling the world and battling natives of different areas to put claim to the land. Land grabbing imo is, and always will be the biggest reasons for all wars.
Fast forward to when areas all over the globe were claimed separated into countries and regions and named. Border lines were drawn up, and eventually people needed formal documentation to travel and enter these places. Unless army’s tried to invade and claim the land illegally as they still do to this day.
So after a long winded waffle, I’d say we’ve arrived at a point where border lines have to be respected and gaurded for security reasons. I’d say authorities of each country need to know exactly who’s entering or trying to enter each country and why.
As I’ve said, I have no issue what so ever with migrants from anywhere in the world travelling to and settling here, if they have good intensions.
I appreciate and respect any of them who come here to start a new life, work and contribute to the tax system and raise their families
I have absolutely no problem with refugees coming here from war torn countries and regions for safety reasons.
What I do have an issue with, is immigrants (from any country or any colour)just arriving through the back door with no passport no paperwork, no money and not under any threat.
As I’ve said, if that makes me racist, then so be it.
If you and others feel we should just let anyone from anywhere, however they’ve arrived into the country, then it’s back to my original question.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by William Treseder

Well seeing as I’ve asked the question, I’ll try and give you my thoughts as clearly as I can without googling or getting a definition from a book.
I honestly wasn’t sure myself as I asked the question, as like yourself, I too have never given it much thought.
Again being honest, the reason the thought entered my head, was the replies from yourself, Birchgrove, Dorcus, Sludge etc appeared to be along the lines of anyone wanting to stop certain migrants from entering the country, or send them back, made you an uninformed bigoted racist. So my natural thought was if you and the others are willing to accept absolutely anyone entering the country without any documentation, or without good reason, then why have borders and passports? Off the top of my head, I’d say the main reason would be security.
Obviously yrs ago, before planes and trains humans being the curious creatures they are started travelling anywhere in the world that a boat would take them, and settling where ever they wanted and could survive.
That then progressed to larger groups travelling the world and battling natives of different areas to put claim to the land. Land grabbing imo is, and always will be the biggest reasons for all wars.
Fast forward to when areas all over the globe were claimed separated into countries and regions and named. Border lines were drawn up, and eventually people needed formal documentation to travel and enter these places. Unless army’s tried to invade and claim the land illegally as they still do to this day.
So after a long winded waffle, I’d say we’ve arrived at a point where border lines have to be respected and gaurded for security reasons. I’d say authorities of each country need to know exactly who’s entering or trying to enter each country and why.
As I’ve said, I have no issue what so ever with migrants from anywhere in the world travelling to and settling here, if they have good intensions.
I appreciate and respect any of them who come here to start a new life, work and contribute to the tax system and raise their families
I have absolutely no problem with refugees coming here from war torn countries and regions for safety reasons.
What I do have an issue with, is immigrants (from any country or any colour)just arriving through the back door with no passport no paperwork, no money and not under any threat.
As I’ve said, if that makes me racist, then so be it.
If you and others feel we should just let anyone from anywhere, however they’ve arrived into the country, then it’s back to my original question.

---

To be honest I don't give illegal immigrants much thought; there's an awful lot more things to worry about IMO. I probably worry more about Vinnie Tan than anyone arriving here on a boat.

Well this thread turned again 😔

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JamesWales

Well this thread turned again 😔

---

Back on topic, then. Maccabi Tel Aviv were smashed 3-0 by Midtjylland last night, which was great news - they were the final leg in a five-timer that won me £34 for a £5 bet.

I note MTA are playing their home Europa League games in Serbia and the crowds are tiny. Does anyone know why the hordes of Israeli fans are not travelling to Serbia to support their side? Are they not allowed?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by William Treseder

I have absolutely no problem with refugees coming here from war torn countries and regions for safety reasons. What I do have an issue with, is immigrants (from any country or any colour) just arriving through the back door with no passport no paperwork, no money and not under any threat.

---

So presumably you have no problem with asylum seekers arriving in the UK on small boats? That being the case, it leads back to my original question - how do you define an illegal immigrant?

I’m not trying to catch you out here, it’s a complicated issue for sure and one with lots of grey areas. I have some thoughts myself, but I’ll share those once you’ve shared yours, as it was you who raised the issue of illegal immigrants without defining who you believe those people actually are.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Lone Gunman

I note MTA are playing their home Europa League games in Serbia and the crowds are tiny. Does anyone know why the hordes of Israeli fans are not travelling to Serbia to support their side? Are they not allowed?

---

As an addition to this, according to Soccerbase, the crowds for Maccabi Tel Aviv's games in Serbia this season have been as follows:

421 v Pafos (30/07/25)
145 v Hamrun Spar (14/08/25)
115 v Dynamo Kyiv (21/08/25)
255 v Dinamo Zagreb (02/10/25)

No attendance declared for last night's game yet.

So why are their crowds in Serbia so low?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Lone Gunman

As an addition to this, according to Soccerbase, the crowds for Maccabi Tel Aviv's games in Serbia this season have been as follows:

421 v Pafos (30/07/25)
145 v Hamrun Spar (14/08/25)
115 v Dynamo Kyiv (21/08/25)
255 v Dinamo Zagreb (02/10/25)

No attendance declared for last night's game yet.

So why are their crowds in Serbia so low?

---

255 against Zagreb? Where were the Croatians?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Lone Gunman

So presumably you have no problem with asylum seekers arriving in the UK on small boats? That being the case, it leads back to my original question - how do you define an illegal immigrant?

I’m not trying to catch you out here, it’s a complicated issue for sure and one with lots of grey areas. I have some thoughts myself, but I’ll share those once you’ve shared yours, as it was you who raised the issue of illegal immigrants without defining who you believe those people actually are.

---

I’d say illegal immigrants are immigrants that enter a country by boat, or without any passport, or documentation or anyone who has a visa that has run out but still remains in that country or asylum seekers that have been refused asylum but still remain. You may want to call them undocumented immigrants or migrants in an irregular situation.
I’d prefer to just call them illegal. After all you wouldn’t have described the SS as German tourists would you?
What’s your take on it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by William Treseder

I’d say illegal immigrants are immigrants that enter a country by boat, or without any passport, or documentation or anyone who has a visa that has run out but still remains in that country or asylum seekers that have been refused asylum but still remain. You may want to call them undocumented immigrants or migrants in an irregular situation.
I’d prefer to just call them illegal. After all you wouldn’t have described the SS as German tourists would you?
What’s your take on it?

---

If someone arrives in the UK by boat from a war zone having suffered persecution and in fear of their lives, having lost everything including passport and documentation, should they be refused entry to the UK and be abandoned to their fate? Second question, if that were you in a similar position and you went knocking on the door of a foreign country to be let in, how would you feel if that country told you to f**k off?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dorcus

If someone arrives in the UK by boat from a war zone having suffered persecution and in fear of their lives, having lost everything including passport and documentation, should they be refused entry to the UK and be abandoned to their fate? Second question, if that were you in a similar position and you went knocking on the door of a foreign country to be let in, how would you feel if that country told you to f**k off?

---

1st answer. If you’ve suffered persecution in a war zone, and have feared for your life, why would you want to put your life in danger once again crossing 26 miles in a rubber boat that is overcrowded, when you’ve already reached the safety of mainland Europe?
2nd question. I’ve already said we should welcome refugees from war torn regions,.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by William Treseder

1st answer. If you’ve suffered persecution in a war zone, and have feared for your life, why would you want to put your life in danger once again crossing 26 miles in a rubber boat that is overcrowded, when you’ve already reached the safety of mainland Europe?
2nd question. I’ve already said we should welcome refugees from war torn regions,.

---

Maybe because the 26 mile crossing is the least of it and they happen to speak English. I know that would be an incentive for me because it would mean settling into a new life would be a whole lot easier.

Given the crazy number of people caught up in war torn regions around the World then it seems our immigrant population can only steadily grow

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dorcus

Maybe because the 26 mile crossing is the least of it and they happen to speak English. I know that would be an incentive for me because it would mean settling into a new life would be a whole lot easier.

Given the crazy number of people caught up in war torn regions around the World then it seems our immigrant population can only steadily grow

---

Does no part of you get concerned about the rate of immigration, issues of cost when we have millions of people in need ourselves, community integration, cultural changes, safety issues of not being aware of who the people are etc? Last week there was a story of the guy who threatened to kill Farage who had a string of offences in Sweden under a different name. Today we are reading about the guy who claims to be 19 and murdered the woman at Walsall station etc.

Genuine question to find some common ground.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dorcus

Maybe because the 26 mile crossing is the least of it and they happen to speak English. I know that would be an incentive for me because it would mean settling into a new life would be a whole lot easier.

Given the crazy number of people caught up in war torn regions around the World then it seems our immigrant population can only steadily grow

---

So back to my previous question. Why not just do away with borders and passports and just make it a free for all for everyone?
That way if wars break out we can just freely move to the next peaceful region. Once a war breaks out in that region we can all freely move onto the next peaceful region and so on and so on.
Another thought. If war broke out in the UK or some evil dictator tried to invade the UK, I think the men of the UK would stay and fight and the women, kids and old folk would be evacuated to safer regions. That’s what the Ukrainians did. It seems to be the other way round looking at all the passengers in these boats and dinghy’s.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by William Treseder

So back to my previous question. Why not just do away with borders and passports and just make it a free for all for everyone?
That way if wars break out we can just freely move to the next peaceful region. Once a war breaks out in that region we can all freely move onto the next peaceful region and so on and so on.
Another thought. If war broke out in the UK or some evil dictator tried to invade the UK, I think the men of the UK would stay and fight and the women, kids and old folk would be evacuated to safer regions. That’s what the Ukrainians did. It seems to be the other way round looking at all the passengers in these boats and dinghy’s.

---

I'm not in any way against the dissolution of nation states and borders so I admire your thinking

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dorcus

I'm not in any way against the dissolution of nation states and borders so I admire your thinking

---

Who do we pay our taxes to?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JamesWales

Who do we pay our taxes to?

---

The Government as usual

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JamesWales

Who do we pay our taxes to?

---

I have an answer to that. We could just cut out the middle man (Our useless government) and give our taxes away like they do. Last yr it was £110m to Pakistan to help them buy condoms, a few million to Zimbabwe to help them install friendship benches, and so on and so on.
Then we could hike up our own taxes in a budget to subsidise all that.

More on the Maccabi saga, from a Jewish football fan, Elijah Aldridge, an organiser with Ipswich Fans Supporting Food Banks.

He writes that, on hearing the ban on Maccabi fans described as an attack on Jews, “I know this is a lie”:

“This is about the British Government using Jews as a shield — to excuse racism, whitewash violence, and criminalise solidarity with Palestine. Antisemitism is being weaponised: not to protect Jewish people, but to protect power. It has become the acceptable face of Islamophobia, used to suppress dissent and justify state complicity in genocide.”

He is quite clear, having visited Aston Villa many times, that the community there isn’t the problem. What puts him in danger, he believes is the conflation between fascistic fans and Judaism.



https://www.jewishvoiceforlabour.org...cles-for-you_1

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JamesWales

Does no part of you get concerned about the rate of immigration, issues of cost when we have millions of people in need ourselves, community integration, cultural changes, safety issues of not being aware of who the people are etc? Last week there was a story of the guy who threatened to kill Farage who had a string of offences in Sweden under a different name. Today we are reading about the guy who claims to be 19 and murdered the woman at Walsall station etc.

Genuine question to find some common ground.

---

This is your next question, Dorcus!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by William Treseder

I have an answer to that. We could just cut out the middle man (Our useless government) and give our taxes away like they do. Last yr it was £110m to Pakistan to help them buy condoms, a few million to Zimbabwe to help them install friendship benches, and so on and so on.
Then we could hike up our own taxes in a budget to subsidise all that.

---

They give our taxes away to the rich. Even people like Andrew Windsor get to live rent free in a 30 room mansion, never having done a stroke of work in his life! (Though it is said he's done a fair bit of stroking in his time, but that's another story).

I'd far rather my money go to Pakistan to buy condoms. Anyway wouldn't that fit in with your aspirations? Less of them to potentially arrive here?

No part of me whatsoever. There are more problems to address

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dorcus

No part of me whatsoever. There are more problems to address

---

So if a 50 or one million undocumented men arrived a year..no issues or concerns at all?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dorcus

They give our taxes away to the rich. Even people like Andrew Windsor get to live rent free in a 30 room mansion, never having done a stroke of work in his life! (Though it is said he's done a fair bit of stroking in his time, but that's another story).

I'd far rather my money go to Pakistan to buy condoms. Anyway wouldn't that fit in with your aspirations? Less of them to potentially arrive here?

---

It’s don’t mind how many folk move here from Pakistan, as long as it’s done legally.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JamesWales

So if a 50 or one million undocumented men arrived a year..no issues or concerns at all?

---

No but women would be better

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dorcus

No part of me whatsoever. There are more problems to address

---

Like why we donated £5m to China last yr to help show them how to grow rice.?