Fast fact check
Posted by diogenes on 2026-October-9 17:14:19, Friday
In reply to uk woke (fascist) govt locks down town to hide... posted by beracine on 2026-October-9 00:32:46, Friday
|
This is a very silly opinion piece by scuzz rag Daily Express columnist Carole Malone. You can look up her Wikipedia page and find out that she has a habit of making false claims that her scuzz rag then has to retract - so, not the most reliable source of information. Here is just a sample of the many inaccuracies in beracine's linked article. Gosport was locked down / residents had to stay home — false. A Section 34 dispersal order is used to give police the power to direct people to leave a specific area (e.g. the area around a building where migrants have temporary accommodation). But the order does not confine residents to their homes. Protesters were restricted to a designated car park — The police order did direct people seeking to gather to that area. But the purpose and scope described by police were controls on the specific gathering, not a blanket ban on residents being in the streets. Restrictions on where protests can gather and the routes they can take are completely usual. “350 residents” protested — false. BBC reports put the demonstration at about 150 people. “150 illegal migrants” — false. The Home Office figure was 149 people rescued mid-Channel and brought ashore. More importantly, someone who enters the UK without the required permission can be described as an unauthorised or irregular migrant; UK immigration law also calls certain entry without leave “illegal entry.” But simply coming ashore does not, by itself, establish every person’s legal status or prove a criminal offence. Nor does the label establish that someone has no valid asylum claim. A person may seek asylum after an irregular arrival. Police checkpoints questioning people — false. There were police orders, and road disruption, but not the article’s specific claim that police checkpoints asked drivers and pedestrians where they were going and what they were doing. Claims that migrants get housing and healthcare “Brits don’t get” — false. People seeking asylum who are destitute can qualify for separate asylum accommodation and support; they are not thereby receiving social housing or mainstream benefits. Asylum seekers with active claims are entitled to NHS care, but that does not support the article’s implication that they receive a different, superior healthcare system to British residents. Protests were mostly peaceful — false. Police reported flares, scuffles, injuries to police officers, and 12 arrests for suspected offences including assaulting police, affray, and racially aggravated public-order offences. I could go on, but this will do for now. Clearly, the piece is rubbish.  |
Follow ups: