James O'Brien educates caller falsely claiming deported refugees can return from Rwanda | LBC
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 14 มิ.ย. 2022
- James O'Brien educates this caller who falsely claims refugees will be able to return to Britain if their asylum applications are approved in Rwanda.
#JamesOBrien #Rwanda #LBC
LBC is the home of live debate around news and current affairs. We let you join the conversation and hold politicians to account.
Subscribe for more: l-bc.co/subscribe
Watch more here:
The latest coronavirus videos: l-bc.co/Covid19Latest
The best of LBC: l-bc.co/3gUh1ZH
LBC holding politicians to account: l-bc.co/3p1v3eC
The latest Brexit videos: l-bc.co/BrexitLatest
The best of Nick Ferrari: l-bc.co/NickFerrari
The best of James O’Brien: l-bc.co/JamesObrien
The best of Iain Dale: l-bc.co/IainDale
Heated debates: l-bc.co/3r8nVyS
The latest Donald Trump videos: l-bc.co/DonaldTrump
Join in the conversation and listen at www.lbc.co.uk/
Sign up to LBC’s weekly newsletter here: l-bc.co/signup
Like, follow and subscribe to LBC!
Website: lbc.co.uk
Facebook: lbc
Twitter: / lbc
Instagram: / lbc
This is not your ordinary talk radio stream. LBC is the leading TH-cam channel for live debate around the news and current affairs. We have live interviews and debates and you can even phone in to join in the conversation.
This is a prime example of how American politics has slowly and insidiously seeped into British society. This man, in the middle of an immigration debate, just announced he was in the military and how he "works to keep this country safe" and immediately expected James to just give him validation.
P5p5p5p5p5p55p
P5p5
5pp5p5p55pp5p5
This isn't American politics, the UK has had these issues for ages now, it really started going with Thatcher, and then when the Tories stole power through the Lib Dems, it came to full circle.
I noticed that he didn't specify what his job in the military is. Given the wide range of careers in the military, many of which aren't directly responsible for "keeping the country safe" it's a bit of a strange oversight to not mention your actual role. I'm almost getting to the point where, when somebody makes a claim based on their job, I now want proof of what they actual do.
I came to UK without papers and seeked asylum. I studied nursing and have been working as a nurse in hospital. I've looked after patients throughout COVID. Thank you James for the light in the dark.
Occurrence is not prevalence.
through your deeds as a nurse, covid or no covid, you are also 'a light in the dark' - be very proud of yourself... :-)
@@thegrandmuftiofwakanda ...nowhere near as clever as you thought it was.
@@thegrandmuftiofwakanda It is if it occurs often enough!
Your a great person Timi 👍
Caller-I’m not spluttering inanely
James-oh no you are, that’s another fact
This man is needed in United States media immediately
Nooo bro. James is one of our own..we'd be f**ked without him
You can't have him
@@strictostrict hahaha indeed.
He would be huge here..
LOL!! Agree. But our friends across the pond would never allow that. Nor should they.
No other presenter ANYWHERE comes close to how brilliant James O'Brien was there. Stunning.
Feckn joking aren’t you😂
Lasquez111 Go and cheer on Trump and Putin you ghoul.
@@Lasquez111IDIOT ALSRT!!! Maybe you’re from watfud too? Fool.
Anybody who thinks that the ticket to Rwanda is anything more than a one way ticket is deluding themselves. Out of sight out of mind.
Why should just anyone turn up and settle in the UK. We are a tiny island with the 4th biggest population in the whole of Europe. Also it's all funded by borrowing & governmenet debt.
@@imagecollections6665 who is arguing that just anyone should be able to just turn up and settle in the UK? I think what you're doing in building a strawman
@@imagecollections6665 Rwanda’s population density is 525 per km2, while the UK’s density is 281 per km2. The argument that we can’t handle more people doesn’t work anymore.
@@BeardiusMaximus your argument is the straw man. These are almost exclusively young males who dump their ID and mobile phones just before getting picked up by border force. On top that, they can afford thousands to get on the dinghy in the first place. They have escaped whatever danger they may or may not have been in and they are shopping for asylum.
None of them are desperate enough to escape France that they need to be granted asylum.
There's no doubt that it is a one-way ticket but have you read section 16 of the agreement?
"16 Resettlement of vulnerable Refugees
16.1 The Participants will make arrangements for the United Kingdom to resettle a portion of Rwanda’s most vulnerable refugees in the United Kingdom, recognising both Participants’ commitment towards providing better international protection for refugees."
The UK will take refugees from Rwanda. Patel is being very quiet about that.
Cost for first year is £120 million to send 300 asylum seekers which equates to £400,000 each . Article 16 outlines that this is an exchange one for one with Rwandan refugees . The process is about populist distraction and heavy corruption, considering Rishi Sunaks wife is involved with business interests in Rwanda.
It almost makes you wonder why we don't save some money by giving them £200,000 each for housing/ training/business start-up and let them get on with it. Especially since the average Mail reader thinks they get a "free house" and "a load of benefits" already.
State of NHS is enough reason to not want anymore bums (fighting aged men who abandoned their families. Pay 1000’s to traffickers, throw documents & phones in the sea, running from a country that doesn’t pay for them to live for free)
@@girlfrommars7015 The NHS is in a state because of decades of under-investment and buggering about by successive governments, most of them Tory.
Many of the "fighting age men" have fled because they do not wish to be used as canon-fodder for the likes of the Assad regime. Feel free to fight in their place if you wish.
Asylum seekers do not wish to "live for free". They are forbidden from working by Tory decree. They receive a maximum of £40.85/week in Asylum Support. You try it.
@@girlfrommars7015 But again, Article 16 means, we're not decreasing the numbers of refugees, your unfounded prejudice notwithstanding.
Again, Liberals are seen as opposed, Conservatives are seen as for. Its irrelevant. It's immoral or economically redundant. Bad regardless of political identity.
People like this guy is the reason we are where we are with the Tories.
😂😂😂😂 and the alternative is Labour just remind me how last Labour government went 🤔
@@terrahawk1977 Last Labour government aren't this Labour government you absolute plum.. You daft working class Tories love to mention irrelevant previous governments, when your own is an absolute shambles as we speak and has been for over a decade. I think youre embarrassed by who you voted for in honesty..
@@terrahawk1977 They were far from perfect and Iraq aside they did pretty well to be fair . Sure start , an improved NHS , lower waiting lists , 20,000 more police officers , new school buildings .
Pretty well 🤔🤔 that's debatable definitely at end with the mess they left country in. I'm no blue nor am I a red whole lot should fk off and we start again
@@terrahawk1977 We had better wait times then the current government & my fuel bill wasn't so high. I could go on but you get the point.
It's worrying how many people don't understand that the Rwanda ticket is one way, and not just offshore processing.
I was shocked when I found that out a few days after the deal was announce
As it should be, why should they be a burden to Britain?
@@AleXoEx0 they shouldn't be, they should be allowed to work while they are waiting for their applications to go through, like other countries do.
@@AleXoEx0 derrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
@@danowat4302 we don't need more poorly education financially down trodden in this country. Wonder why wages aren't increasing anywhere in line with inflation and productivity? Your government keep importing and allowing the entry of hoards of scab labour from places that are barely functional on their own where these people originate.
this should be investigated then if this man is claiming the military officers are spreading misinformation.
Yep but I very much doubt he is in the military.
If he is a soldier, his superiors are the government. I have no qualms believing they told him something other than the truth...
@@deeingalaplike That's a complete load of nonsense that guy has sworn to secrecy.
I very much doubt he wants to lose his job on national radio.
@@AwesomeMetalBands oh how naive you are.
@@markhayden886 He is a, Walter Mitty. . . When he said, "The UK isn't deporting these people, they're just moving them Off Country". I nearly PMSL, that's So Funny! It is literally deporting them. What a numpty!
He is bringing the service into disrepute. He used his job as a way to give him authenticity, but when caught out for misinterpreting the policy he is trying to dig himself out. He was best off keeping his job out of it. Now he looks the fool.
Exactly.
This ‘Military’ Personnel need to be Investigated!
@@mariathomas4686 No he doesn't. He's either a very low rank or not even part of the military. There's a small chance that this will be a seed and he'll actually go and read the law as it's written and change his mind.
@@sueyourself5413 He claimed his "superior officers" instructed him on the policy , at the very least these "superior officers" need to be investigated for giving false and misleading information to the junior ranks who have to carryout their orders. It is also the duty of all personnel to know the law and not follow an unlawful order (as "I was just following orders" is not a defence).
Or of course he could just a Tory, which means *everything* he says is a lie.
I don't agree he could be right. They could easily appeal the decision.
@@thepoliticalhousethatjackbuilt He claimed a lot of things. All of which turned out to be BS.
If this guy is really in the British military it becomes more apparent that they just will not accept that they’ve got their facts wrong, been misinformed, fed a line of communication that couldn’t possibly be false and swallowed it. James brilliantly sets the record straight again and again and they’re still in complete denial to the point of embarrassment……
"They're not deporting them, they're just moving them off country to a different place." I guess he was badly instructed on words having a meaning, as well.
"No, no - I'm not burgling your home - I'm just redistributing your assets..."
@@ahotmic 👍 😂😂
@@ahotmic Irony is lost on you isn't it? Illegal immigrants aren't an "asset". They travel to the UK to take the UK's assets. Nobody cares where burglars are sent to, you just want them far away from your property.
@@oldbloke135 Sorry - I forgot - they're all the same eh? Paranoia isn't lost on you is it? Liz Trump 2022! Make Britain white again!
And to think that this guy, and loads more like him, are supposed to be responsible for the security of the country, as he claims. But then, his claims are not supported by facts.
His claim to be in the military is also unsupported by facts.
@@zivkovicable That's exactly what Noel said.
Bit like someone you have a conversation with in a pub who rubs their nose and raises their eyes "I know" when you challenge them.
judging by the accent it's a public school leaver working at some thinktank.
Squaddies don't talk like that, and a junior officer would know better than contact a phone-in programme.
The closest that caller's been to the military is a member of the Airfix modeller's club.
@@zivkovicable and a military should not mix in politics.
"Not deporting them, moving them "Off country" Jesus Christ!
I know right? ... I'm now trying "unhear" that! So bad, the level of ignorance is beyond me.
Being moved "off country" in a specific and limited way.
reminds me of the Russian "special military operation" which looks like a war, sounds like a war, feels like a war ... but must not be called "a war".
... what is "moving someone forcefully "off country" " in one word? yes, the word which "must not be used"
Jim's soul was moving "off country" as James eviscerated him with words, facts and logic.
A prime example of mental gymnastics.
the "fear factor" has worked with this one "they" "them" the suspicion is embedded in the caller but he doesn't realise it
I think he was lying that his superiors advised. Also these “well spoken” people who have people lapping all their “opinions” are the worst because they’ll have you convinced they’re right. James came with facts and the caller still called them opinions. What a mess.
The constant scoffing from the caller... He was so indignant and so sure he was right.
It's a depressing feature of modern life that people dismiss facts as just opinion, as if there's no longer such a thing as objective truth.
he flips burgers for a living in reality
I'd give him the benefit of doubt. I don't think hes so malicious and immoral as a person that he'd tell blatant lies about how a superior officer told him thats how the asylum process works. I think a superior officer was talking politics, in a casual, unofficial capacity, but he interpreted it to be objective facts being delivered to him by his commanding officer, presumbably handed down to them from even higher up the ladder.
As for the "written policy" that he can't produce and isn't willing to talk about, I don't believe it. What reason is there for a military officer to receive written notification from the brass which clarifies exactly how the asylum seeking process works. And if there really was such a letter (perhaps for members of the service who have friends or family seeking asylum that the military want to keep informed as a courtesy), there is absolutely no way that such a letter regarding public and civilian procedures would be classified material, or have to be kept confidential. How can the civilian procedures of seeking asylum be considered a military secret?
"I'm in the military" ~ Great advert for the armed forces there. Like oh goody we're being guarded by halfwits.
More like quarterwits if they're all like him.
They are not sending their brightest and best.
@@marvintpandroid2213 I remember brexxies boasting about David 'thickasmince' Davis former military career and how he would take Barnier to the cleaners. Lol.
We all know how THAT worked out.
Seeing their job is to go around the world invading and occupying its nit surprising
@@ellied.violet7372 what TA SAS 😆.
Wow this guy tries to excuse himself with "this is what I've been told" and then goes immediately into trying to avoid throwing his commanding officers under the bus.
Commanding officer/Daily Mail
Isn't this the Nuremberg defence, 'I was only following orders', very worrying.
@@HBFaash I think Nuremberg Defence applies to actions, not beliefs, but there is something troubling about someone holding beliefs against the facts because "that's what I was told" and nothing else.
he would go to military jail if he gives out names, so he can't and James knows this so is being a troll. If James really wanted to check he should contact the MoD, put the claim he was given for rebuttal then tell his fans what the superiors of that soldier said. I've heard it from Talk-Radio presenters they can return, read it in newspaper snippets about the deal, so off you go James, debunk the press, prove you are correct and cite the section in the Rwanda deal where they can't return to the UK if they win the application.
Priti Patel is his CO
James: "who instructed you that?"
The breakthrough in that line was AMAZING
Poorly informed right-winger: "I'm in the military"...
Surprise surprise
So people in the military are bad now to. Do you just hate everyone that doesn’t think what you think? What a way to live your life…..
@@willnicholson18 ?
This policy not being classed as deportation is very much the same as Rishi Sunak’s £200 ‘rebate’ on energy bills which had to be paid back wasn’t a loan.
I love this analogy. Love it. Precisely
"50000 new nurses" 🥴
😅
you're right. Do you have an alternative? How about we commission 5 star luxury cruise ships to pick up passport shy illegal immigrants from Calais and carry them straight to the UK and then via limousine onward to 4 star hotels? Would that work better for you? I suppose it would save money on the legal aid bill.
@@raymondo6665 There's a very credible alternative, it's called "actually helping people who have nothing and quit pretending we're the victim for taking on a smaller burden than everyone else". Basically, you find people who have crossed the channel, give them a towel, a hot meal, a place with a bed, basic facilities, and have them sit down with a counsellor and an interpreter to get their full story, and we, and this is the most revolutionary part, help them, and stop our moaning about how we're such a downtrodden nation for doing what EVERY country has to do. The cost to the taxpayer is surprisingly low, and an interpreter may not always be necessary, because after hundreds of years of our egotistical empire going around and buggering up nations, English tends to get around.
I mean, it surely cannot cost THAT much to house and feed an asylum seeker? After all, politicians claim you can feed your family for 50p per meal and heat your home for next to nothing. So either they're lying about the cost of living, or lying about the cost of asylum seekers.
It’s not an offshore processing facility, the UK simply deports them, there is no asylum application to the UK. Their asylum application is actually to Rwanda so if successful they get to stay in Rwanda. There is no return flight.
Oh.. but there is a return flight... the only problem being it is asylum seekers from Rwanda being sent to UK in return as part of the agreement 🤪
There will be return flights, with people Rwanda sends.
@@susanplatt5331 No they will NOT. The deal is for Rwanda to permanently settle asylum seekers, they don’t go back to Britain, that’s why there is so much outrage because it’s even worse than other countries which do the same offshore processing, in which case they are processed offshore but if they are ok-Ed they can enter, no so for UK. They go to Rwanda, they are there permanently, unless they get deported back to their country of origin.
@@ruekurei88 It's a swap, they take some of ours, we get some of their vulnerable ones back. Able-bodied, able to work get here on a boat, we take vulnerable ones from Rwanda. Rwanda agreement, paragraph 16.1: "... for the United Kingdom to resettle a portion of Rwanda's most vulnerable refugees in the United Kingdom...".
@@susanplatt5331 Incorrect.
The deal specifically states that asylum seekers who'se application is successfull stay in Rwanda permanently. That's what all of this is about.
The people who are positive are settled in Rwanda, the ones who are not are deported back to their country of origin from Rwanda.
This entire policy has only one purpose: To deny all asylum seekers, legitimate or not, entry to the UK permanently.
The government doesn't seem keen to discuss the reciprical arrangement whereby Rwandan refugees are sent to the UK for settlement.
Thank you James! The caller was sadly a complete fool, believing whatever nonsense the higher ups he wants to believe told him! Unfortunately, too many people just hear whatever they want to hear - anything but the facts.
No one told him that. He’s just all round thick
Compassion for the conned.
I think you are being slightly unfair. He may well have been told by idiots higher up that the arrangement is reciprocal. That James put him right is a bonus. I hope he goes back to his superiors to inform them of their error. Knowledge eh?
@@aimeemacdn I’m not buying that any more.
@@campbell1213 you talkin about his meat 🤣
"I work in the military, keeping people safe"....lol. As a British veteran, I can tell this guy is a Walter.
I hated guys like this, their entire identity is "I'm in the military". What a throbber.
Spot on - the vagueness of his phrase gives it away.
Likewise.
I'm guessing in this context, a Walter is someone who's a small angry barking puppy, but thinks he's a Wolf?
@@DrownedInExile a ‘Walter’ is short for ‘Walter Mitty’ - in other words a complete fantasist and compulsive liar.
“Are we the baddies?” Mitchell & Webb
😅🤣😂I watched that very funny indeed.
I could hear Jim's brain cogs slowly clanking as he was trying to get out of the hole he dug for himself. Well done James for remaining calm while dealing with him.
It always astounds me in this day and age that individuals are incapable of just saying, "I hold my hands up to it. I was misinformed. I was wrong."
Children have more humility.
James doesn’t make it easy he’s extremely rude
@@Predatorsnightmare Aw! Diddums, you....
@@Predatorsnightmare he can be, but on this occasion he was well within his rights to call out that smarmy caller spouting opinions as if they were facts.
@@Predatorsnightmare Responding to tone is a recognised weak argument.
@@Predatorsnightmare At the end of the interview I felt a little bit sorry for the caller which I regret right away considering his ignorance
Yep, I've heard so many people say exactly what this guy is saying.
Statements like "The UK isn't deporting these people, they're just moving them out of the country".
As this is being done without the person's permission - it's the, literal, definition of deporting.....
What do you suggest?
Come in illegally? Then, yea, deport them
@@vvwalker7261 how do you leave a warzone and enter other countries legally?
@@vvwalker7261 not the sharpest tool, are you? But unarguably a tool nonetheless.
@@vvwalker7261 It is not illegal under international treaties (to which the UK are also signatories) to enter a country through whatever means if you intend to seek asylum. The "illegal" tag is just a right-wing buzzword thrown about indiscriminately and without relation to the facts.
He has been instructed by
Top men.
You handled this in your usual clear way well done👍
Outstanding work.
A serious of ludicrous claims. The military is not even involved in the process of immigration and deportation (other than the flight was due leave from a military base). Therefore the idea that "superiors" would be briefing on the details of a government policy that doesn't have any impact on members of the military is just ridiculous.
not true, they have been mobilised in the channel
@@housemonkeychill The OP is correct!
@@housemonkeychill "Mobilised in the channel" 🤣😂🤣
@@housemonkeychill isn't that an episode of Top Gear?
@@housemonkeychill So what are instructions regarding channel traffic to do with flights.
What a gem! If he's an example of the standard of the UK Military, then I'm completely ashamed.........
You don't have to be bright to join the military, in fact I believe the way of teaching and thinking in the military if very much one way, and I don't think it's very sympathetic towards people outside the UK.
The military prefer people who lack critical thinking skills
He is, actually, an above average example.
@@weediestbroom This is the correct answer
We only have his word that he is in the military. He sounds like a fantasist to me. Why would his superiors be discussing immigration policy & deportations with rank & file, when the military is not even involved?
Omg that poor caller. When being told by James if this is true what you are telling me I will have to alert the news desk.
My heart bleeds for him 💔
Maybe the caller, and millions like him, should think things through a bit before spouting off a load of ignorant nonsense on national radio. No sympathy here lol
@@prendersmack1643 100% - years ago we would find paid comics funny - now it uninformed - job less people , how the times have changed !!
Perhaps I did not say the comment correctly, I do not think the caller deserves sympathy.
Yes that was definitely a poo emoji moment.... 💩
Masterclass in peeling off the layers to reveal the truth
😃👍🔥
and thinking for yourself
Got to love James O'BrIen for not allowing some of these callers off the hook with their utter nonsense talk! Know your facts and figures people before potentially subjecting yourselves to humiliation and embarrassment.
It's scary how many people support this Rawanda deportation policy thinking Asylum Seekers can return to the UK if successful.
Even if they were allowed to return, I would still be very against the policy.
I mentioned this to a relative and they too thought Rwanda was just for "processing". This is someone i would have said is fairly well informed generally.
@@thefallencure are they aware the deal includes Rwanda sending people back here for taxpayers to look after.
Even if we ignore the Human Rights aspect of this, isn't sending a plane with a handful of people 4,000+ miles slightly against all the Cop20 "promises" that were made to reduce each countries carbon footprint? The UK seems to be going through the mid-life crisis of all mid-life crises, and I feel there's a lot more to come before the country collectively wakes up.
@@tommyrotton9468 and when they come for your rights? What then Tommy? Access to justice is fundamental and the ability to have a refugee claim processed is a core value of civilised society enshrined in the UNHCR which WE were founder signatories to (it was actually Churchill).
@@tommyrotton9468 Man, please please please try to understand how NGOs work and tax rebates for those who donate to it, in the end of the day it still Tax Payers money - omg why people in this country is so ignorant???
"They're not deporting them, they're moving them off country" the alternative facts cognitive dissonence mental gymnastics are a sight to behold right there.
It's a pity mental gymnastics isn't an olympic sport, these people would bring back the gold every time
Fact.....and highly amusing. ill let someone else do my thinking for me..
Just ask yourself one simple question: 'Would you be okay with the EU deporting british expats to e.g. Nigeria or Peru when they break immigration laws willingly or unwillingly in order to start a new life over there?"
Probably not, eh? lol
The EU ? The Panto villain of all Brexiteers ?
The Tories would lose their nut 😂😂
Yes of course. What's wrong with these places?
@@johngreylove1359 😂😂😂
Seemed to be expecting a round of applause when he said he was keeping the country safe.
I don't feel safe if people like this are the ones defending us
He'd take the PM out if he was keeping us safe
Does "I was only acting under instructions" bring back memories 🤔 What a plonker... if that's the best a UK "military" man can bring up "in the interests of the security of the Country", no wonder the Country is in a huge mess 🙄
This so called "expert" hasn't even bothered to read Art 16 of the agreement with Rwanda... they send *THEIR* refugees back to UK on the return flight as part of the deal! Go figure...
What is the point then? Seems to be just exchanging refugees.
You haven't bothered to read it either, as that's not what it says.
I wish we had someone like James in the US.
John Oliver is close but he doesn't do live phone-in shows
Your press is a lot better over there, believe me. Our print press is basically all owned by right-wing billionaires, and our broadcast media is either too scared to go against the government, or is being threatened with privatisation.
Please take the whinging cxxt.
You do! Jordan Klepper is his glorious name! :)
James O brien is brilliant he always has the facts that tear down these idiots that Don't know what their talking about brilliant keep it up James
They're not their.
Tbf every presenter on LBC has facts to tear down majority of callers from both sides. Otherwise they wouldn’t be employed by LBC.
Sadly though the idiots don't change their positions to reflect the facts, but are allowed to continue to vote.
WELL SAID JAMES! MAN OF TRUTH! WE LOVE YOU!!! # FEARLESS POWER
The ignorance of the English electorate is actually wilful. Too many have bought into the rationale that one can make up their own facts that fit in with their prejudices and biases and that is the way we should all proceed. The Tories actually run a party on that basis and the wilfully ignorant vote for it.
So let's take everyone in eh. Whoop Di dooo
@@windymiller9973 I'll swap you for a refugee and you can experience their life for a while. See how you cope then!
@@windymiller9973 I'd swop you for any asylum seeker in a heart-beat.
See - works both ways doesn't it.
That would have been hilarious had it not been about such a desperately unjust attempt by a Home Sec. to rig a system that undeniably helped her and her family get where she is today. Talk about pulling the ladder up behind you.
One of my mates is originally from Iran. He'd undoubtedly be dead (because his government would have killed him, like they did his brothers) if we hadn't given him asylum in the 90's. I can't help but imagine him being shipped off to Rwanda after thinking he'd made it to safety and how psychologically damaging that would have been.
She is the worst human being l have ever seen and l mean that. I have seen evil and she is the by far e worst.
My daughter teaches English to asylum seekers. The stories that come out during the course of the lessons are heartbreaking. We’re very fortunate to live somewhere relatively stable and should help anyone that we can. We’d hope for the same if we were in their position.
I know, right?
Yeah right ! How many . ? 2 million ? 3 million ? Anybody who just fancies an easier life !?
How many safe countries did he pass through in his way here ?
Has he actually contributed anything to the UK since he arrived. ?
James O'Brien slowly pulling the wings off a trapped fly... and it's wonderful!
"what word do you prefer because I'm keen to be generous" 😂😂😂 ouch
This has to be the best JOB call yet omg so funny.
You missed the Brexit-Calls of 2016-2020.
Surely that has to be the ex Nigel forage party member who is Brown himself but hates Brown people.
@@AliRaza-lg7sv lol not seen that one
@@alastairbrewster4274 search top ten brexit calls james o brien. Listen to the 7th one. If I am not wrong it's that one. It's so ridiculous I thought it was someone parodying. Until I actually went out and searched the guys name he was in fact a real person and actually talked like that.
@@AliRaza-lg7sv lol thanks for that!
I love when James puts these clowns on the spot.
Takes one to know one! Eh
@@colinwishbone4437 were you the caller? 😂
James has a public school cruelness that for once is being used on the right targets.
I wish this LBC presenter was our prime minister so that we have logical and mature people running the country, bravo 👏
Are you joking, James has a personality disorder.
🤣🤣🤣🤣 you’re having a fking laugh 🤣🤣🤣
@@eveoakley6270 not at all. It’s clear to see.
@@choppernumberone7279 my response was to the initial comment. I agree with you, James is off his rocker.
I would not want to have that Champagne Socialist as prime minister
The only people who can come here are Rwanda’s own refugees. It’s a two way deal. GB will receive some vulnerable refugees from Rwanda. No-one talking about this!
You right. It make no sense at all. Even the most mathermatically chanleged gammons should be able to see through this farce! It's just more flag waving propaganda from Pitiful Patel. More headlines to feed to the plebs to keep them happy!
Are you worried about a deluge of Rawandan refugees invading britain....
Even if it were true. How could someone seeking asylum manage to get themselves back from Rwanda?
how true, great comment...
Illegals immigrants. Not asylum
They can’t there’s no legal mechanism to do so..
Once someone has been ‘encouraged’ to seek asylum in Rwanda - that’s it - why would they come back here ? It’s the deportees who refuse to seek asylum in Rwanda and want to come back to the UK - what happens to them ?
By boat.
James: *"Who told you the false information or did you just humiliate yourself on national radio?"*
Caller: *"Er....."*
Oh my days!😂
James humiliates himself on every one of his shows. He bathes in false information and the listeners mostly lap it up like total mugs. He bullies callers. He tries to humiliate people into silence with non sequitur, especially ad hominem attacks, when someone dares to have an opinion.
Bet this guy isn't even in the military. A fantasist who thinks he's some kind of hero
I thought only up until yesterday that the asylum seekers only stay in Rwanda while their application is processed. There must be loads of people who think the same. I based this on the worryingly wrong assumption that the British government would not permanently deport successful asylum applicants.
Then why TF would they process them in Rwanda? What sane person would assume that it makes sense to send them thousands of miles away for the reasonable possibility they would come back? Why not process them instead at e.g. the port of Dover? If offshore, why not somewhere MUCH closer? Just spending a moment to logically think this through should be enough to see the flaws in this argument.
@@vikdaddy I also thought the whole point was to hold them there while their applications are processed. I assumed that the government would find reasons to hold up applications and all that, in order to keep these people in Rwanda, but I thought that if any are successful, they come back to the UK. I am probably thinking exactly what the government want me to think. They likely hoped people would think successful asylum seekers could return. It isn't logical, but our government has long since proven that they are just doing whatever they want, and peddle whatever lies they want and see what sticks.
Today I learnt something new. I hated the policy anyway, but hate it worse now.
what's the evidence they wouldn't come back? it is pretty obvious to assume that but James said it's written in law and you say you've just learnt that. as someone not up to speed with this topic I'd be very grateful if you'd tell me as I can't find any info here (don't want to sound like I doubt you, I'm with you, just not up to speed with the topic) 🙏
@@antoniczujwid9380 Their asylum appeal processed in Rwanda if successful grants them asylum status in Rwanda not the UK. If they managed to get back to the UK they already have refugee status in Rwanda so the only way to claim refugee status in the UK would be to prove that they were fleeing Rwanda because they were unsafe there which given the UK deems it a safe country wouldn't be accepted.
@@Steve_Coates jesus christ... so they just straight up lie and hope we believe them? what a mess
I think a lot of people believe that, because it is put together by the British government. We just believe that they are being processed in Rwanda and when their asylum is granted that would mean that they can live in UK.
If this had been the case the applications could have been processed directly in France, and there wouldn’t have been any need for the asylum seekers to cross the Chanel, and for British government to pay enormous money to Rwanda as well as deportation costs.
@@someoneno-one7672 the french are sending them here.
@@someoneno-one7672 Well, if you're going to be logical...
@@housemonkeychill not "sending them" just not offering a means of assessing them in France because we refused their offer in favour of Rwanda.
It was clearly stated by Patel in PMQs that we weren't allowing them back. No papers covered it.
I am always so grateful for James putting these nutters in their place. Wish we had someone like him in Canada.
‘Who they are and what they are’ sounds so ridiculous. Jim sounds like that immigration officer from Come Fly With Me.
To use some military slang of my own here, this man sounds like a complete "walt".
Or SNAFU? 😃
'My job is in the military, and keeping this country safe'. So he's happy to be part of the issue which causes a lot of people to need to seek a new life, but he's not happy for victims of his job to come here....
I want to know who is protecting the country from him and his ilk?
Doubt he’s in the military.
If he was miltary he'd know better than to violate QR by calling in, more likely he's one of those fantasists who sit at the end of the bar claiming to be SAS or in military parlance a Walt.
James O’Brien I think I love you. You are the only journalist who can sniff out knuckleheads. Guaranteed a laugh with every interview video.
" Military" man just came on air and made a show of himself.
What a call! Kelly Ann Conway would have been proud of him…
She was an absolutely embarrassment on Bill Maher the other night
Is Jim in Watford really in the military? He's already a proven liar.
That didn’t stop our current PM getting his job.
no
AS a group, asylum seekers are the most highly qualified demographic in the UK. It's not difficult to work out, when a country ends up in strife, it's the educated middle-classes who have the resources to get out. There are literally thousands of qualified medical staff and teachers sat in bedsits waiting for their applications to be processed. All they need, is to be put through language and skills testing/training and they could be working contributing to the economy in a very short period of time.
😂
Yeah, right.
As Germany realised...a great source of highly skilled workers which cost the country nothing in training funds.
We might start by having them replace a lot of Tory ministers of State.
@@Curmudgeonist If you are going to make claims about the specifics of studies, it would help if you cited the source. Because I'm unable to locate it.
when that caller said his job in the military was to keep the country safe, no, his job was to follow orders for pay.
What job in the military?
He's not in the military 😂
Did the caller keep this country safe when the UK regime destroyed Libya?
Asking for a friend
He can't tell you, it's all very hush hush. But he can assure you that whatever he did was correct and perfectly infallible.
Tell your friend...No
You can tell this is British. Even after arguing with each other they are both polite about ending the call.
Here's the thing - every single one of the people on that flight have a legal right to request asylum in the UK. Patel has effectively criminalised THEM rather than the traffickers for coming to the country via the only routes available to them. Instead of spending our money on actually sorting asylum claims, Patel's plan is to let Rwanda dissappear these people and to charge us for doing so.
yep. And UK citizens have the legal right to disapprove of a system that allows illegal immigrants to enter the UK. Shame UK citizens don't have more rights but that's not what Human Right legislation (and legal aid) is for....is it?
@@raymondo6665 someone seeking asylum is not illegal. If they have a faster, easier to access, application process that is physically accessible, for instance having an application office in France ;refugees and asylum seeker's would not have to cross the channel in rubber boats, to then be waiting ages to be accepted.
@@adamm4062 why not go the whole hog and put an hourly ferry service on for them? Maybe we could build new 4 star hotels at the taxpayer's expense. After all if they're escaping war torn France they must be desperate.
@@raymondo6665 emotive exaggeration of my comment with ab absurdo reasoning in place of any concrete argument is really disappointing and unfortunate tbh
@@adamm4062 faux outrage when someone has the temerity to disagree is only to be expected on here. Open them thar Borders........everyone is welcome....plenty of taxpayer's money available for all.......
Didn't want to admit he'd been tricked hy the media again 🤣
Don't we have to take Rwandan refugees in return?...insane!
Consider that we are sending people to a country that produces refugees.
Somebody from the military moaning about people rocking up to his doorstep without paperwork is perhaps the most ironic thing I've ever heard. Now he knows how Afghanis felt in 2001 when his lot conducted an illegal invasion.
“I have listened- that’s the problem Jim”
Mic. Drop.
1. Tag them - insecurity gone
2. Let them work - Cost gone
Also, most asylum application's win their appeal.
Let them work ? Provided they don't compete for your job of course ?
@@2msvalkyrie529 if a UK citizen loses out in a job interview to someone who has not worked in the UK yet and is just learning the language and culture they don't deserve the job.
It amazes me that so many people seem to not understand that the Rwanda policy is that potential asylum seekers will be sent to Rwanda and settled there. I don’t think they are misinformed by a third party, unless they get their information from other people that don’t get it. I think people are just too astonished by this amorality that they cannot handle the concept that their government, in their name, is doing this.
I was under the impression that people would be sent to Rwanda, and would then apply for permission to settle in England. That's how asylum should work, so that's what I assumed. I've not read a full article on this as it was so stupendously idiotic that I had trouble believing that even Priti Patel would stoop to such a level.
@@owenrichards1418 Both Patel and Johnson have even stated that this was what was going to happen, but amazingly almost no one has reacted to it.
And what's wrong with that exactly. They have managed to go through several safe countries and then wish to come to cushy old England. Tough. Rwanda isn't all that bad and they will get employment there ok.
@@windymiller9973 It's a money laundering scheme so politicians can pocket the money.Australia tried the same scheme: it's not going to solve anything and will cost more money than actual practical solutions.
@@windymiller9973 If I am not mistaken the French government said that they would allow the UK government to build a processing center in Calais for asylum seekers and refugees. The UK government refused and then instead decided to come up with this Rwanda scheme which sends people there against their will and costs more money. Also if I am not mistaken the Rwanda deal also means Britain will take in people from Rwanda in return for the ones that the UK gov sends there.
The Rwandan cops also shot dead 12 refugees during a protest. So I can't say how safe all of the refugees will be over there.
James, your colleague Ian Dale didn’t read it either. He was also shock to hear that is a one ticket for asylum seekers. Have a word with Ian will you.
Yes, coz I tried commenting on one of his horrid uploads... but he'd turned off comments, I wonder why. 😱😬🤦🏻♂️🤷🏻♂️
But it was ok for him and his buddies to walk into Iraq uninvited without the right paperwork!!!!!
What is the answer though? I live across the road from a hotel which now houses hundreds of refugees. There are gangs of what seems to be just young men all round the place all day and all night. They stay out all night around the surrounding streets.
1. Safe routes - if you are not from Hong Kong or Ukraine there are no legal safe routes 2. Process applications faster- it shouldn't take 5 or 6 years. 3. Allow them to work whilst waiting- some are highly qualified, others want to work and we have full employment and can't pick our own food or slaughter our pigs. 5. Faster removals of those who don't qualify-Brexit has made this much more difficult.
Surely not ! I thought they were all surgeons , architects , engineers and so on. According to the virtue signallers on here ?
Article 16 of the Rwanda agreement also states that we have to take the exact number of their asylum seekers into the UK as a straight swap. No one seems to be talking about that either.
“16 Resettlement of vulnerable Refugees
16.1 The Participants will make arrangements for the United Kingdom to resettle a portion of Rwanda’s most vulnerable refugees in the United Kingdom, recognising both Participants’ commitment towards providing better international protection for refugees.”
That’s not really what it says…
which poses the question - what's the point..?
@@OJoRob - which poses the question - what's the point..?
This is correct, however the refugees that will be from Rwanda are special needs refugees.
People who are in need of medical attention, mentally ill, elderly, handicapped, children with PTSD and a whole long list of other needs.
When they board the plane back to UK they will no longer be refugees as they require asylum and immigration documents to enter the UK.
Who is going to pay for this ?
Will the NHS be forced to give treatment or local councils?
There are 170,000 refugees in Rwanda and over 30,000 with the category of " special needs"
This isn't a case of sending illegal immigrants or war refugees for processing as soon as they leave the UK they are processed under Rwandan law not British Law.
The burden of proof of refugee status is with the refugee, normally through the Red Cross. Anyone who enters the UK by boat, plane, horse or whatever and has no documentation have to prove they are a war refugee which can be difficult if your home has been bomben and the family has been murdered and they are running for their lives.
Many have never had a passport and id is also problematic.
In many countries having the wrong name or dialekt is going to get you dead pretty quickly.
There are regulations already in place to deal with this, it's a big problem all over Europe, without any proof of refugee status, this has to be proven by the asylum seekers after investigation they are deported to where ever they claim to come from.before it was back to the first country of entry into the EU not however since brexit.
Even Age is a problem as adults have claimed they are under 18, however this can be verified through a medical and dental examination.
Alot of cheating happens in every European country. In the end, healthy refugees until proved otherwise will be "swapped" for unhealthy people with special needs something the government is keeping very quiet about,....paragraph 16 of the agreement and is a condition of the deal......it's an unworkable and expensive PA exercise costing alot more than the govt budget unless they have calculated the actual costs of medical, social and housing costs for special needs
@@peterjevans8718 - thanks for the explanation... so this could mean britain ends up with more refugees than we send to rwanda and they are more in need of medical care than the ones we send to rwanda...
this could be 'sold' as being very humanitarian, which surely wasn't the original tory goal... hmmm, i wonder what the daily mail will have to say about this...
What sane person would assume that it makes sense to send them thousands of miles away to Rwanda for the reasonable possibility they would come back? Why not process them instead at e.g. the port of Dover? If offshore, why not somewhere MUCH closer? Just spending a moment to logically think this through should be enough to see the flaws in this argument.
i remember when people used logical thought processes, what a wonderful time that was :(
A man in denial can’t accept he’s misunderstood or misinterpreted the policy, doubling down on himself. Very sad……
Wish there were more reporters like this guy here in the US. The news networks are so busy worrying about their ratings and pushing politics that they are little more than corporate mouthpieces.
It's really sad. The UK has an excess of vacancies. These people can be easily employed to stabilise the economy. However, black and brown people are always seen as a threat to the people and their culture.
White people are the biggest snowflakes going.
Sad
Not just the UK. Just look at north America and Australia.
@@mnj640 Not just the UK and North America and Australia. Look at India and China and Japan
@@7QHook they're a threat to the entire white culture it seems.
Jim in Whatford... you could hear the sheer ANGER and FRUSTRATION in his voice when he was caught in the lie. And the desperation when he was trying to worm his way out of it. This interview is probably the biggest embarrassment for the British Armed Forces since Kabul.
If he was genuinely in the armed forces? He has already been caught lying, his military claims may be more of the bs
I’d bet a years wage this idiot Has never served a day in his life
Brilliant! “Imaginary paperwork”!
more of that than actual paperwork....
"That's not my understanding..." To be fair, it's just 'not understanding'!
That was uncomfortable wasn’t it 😆
Uncomfortable is an understatement. He got roasted alive! Jesus! BRUTAL.
This is how they argue xenophobic anti immigration here in the USA
"Claimants would not be allowed to return to the UK and would receive asylum support in Rwanda and either settlement in Rwanda or return to their country of origin." ( committees parliament uk ) "The Rwanda asylum plan, announced by the government in April, sees some asylum seekers who cross the Channel to the UK given a one-way ticket to Rwanda to claim asylum there instead." ( bbc ) This 'Jim' guy clearly can't read.
He probably had a subpar engineer ;)
Jim is not alone
James was definitely bullied at school.
Sounds like you were bullied in school Darren.
This guy got completey picked apart and it was all his own doing, what an epic fail, he must've felt like the biggest idiot when he hung the phone up
The caller sounded very shaky at the end of the call.
Realised that he could be in trouble. 😄
My partner thought that too & wouldn't believe me. It's unbelievable how badly some people have been gaslit
Hope you've changed partner.
It's not surprising, because when they first unveiled this scheme, they weren't very clear about this aspect of this. I'm going to guess they purposefully weren't clear.
This has to be one of the best calls in history 🤣🤣🤣🤣
id agree with that....it just shows you what an education can do for you....or not in Jim's case
From USA......I lovvvvve this Guy.
He’s having a laugh, he works for the military. So when he rolls up in someone else’s country to invade does he apply for a visa to enter from that nation? It’s almost hilarious hypocrisy.
Very true.👍🤗
You can tell this guy polished a speech with no anticipation of being questioned by someone who knows what they’re on about.
I'd watch the news if journalists interviewed people like this.
Exactly ! Totally agree , they’re all way too politically correct
Bring back Jeremy Paxman and you'll have your wish.