Quizzes & Puzzles0 min ago
Immigration: Enough ?
Is it not time to face the facts, & how could anyone not be appalled by the way the government has mishandled this issue?
Who ya gonna call ? (I don't know about you, but it won't be Ghostbusters, I'll be calling the Reform Party)
Who ya gonna call ? (I don't know about you, but it won't be Ghostbusters, I'll be calling the Reform Party)
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Khandro. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
The reason they don’t come by plane is that the carrier and border control would refuse them travel – technically there is no ‘legal’ route for migrants to reach the UK.
However, once they arrive (by whatever means), the UK government is under international obligation to process them, and if they have no valid reason to remain, deport them (by force if necessary).
So the whole problem is the UK government’s failure to process the migrants – they can’t just throw them out, which is what most ABers want.
However, once they arrive (by whatever means), the UK government is under international obligation to process them, and if they have no valid reason to remain, deport them (by force if necessary).
So the whole problem is the UK government’s failure to process the migrants – they can’t just throw them out, which is what most ABers want.
I did in a previous post explain the law that allows someone to roll up to the UK as a migrant (on a boat crossing the channel, or some other means) – later, I’ll re-post the information once I get time.
If these immigrants were really illegal immigrants, the government could deport them – but without processing them, their status is unknown (whether they have a legal right to remain in the UK or not) – so the government cannot deport them.
If these immigrants were really illegal immigrants, the government could deport them – but without processing them, their status is unknown (whether they have a legal right to remain in the UK or not) – so the government cannot deport them.
It now appears, as if all this wasn't enough, that Isis preparing to exploit Europe’s open borders;
'There is a growing sense of unease in France that a new wave of Islamist terrorism will soon break over Europe. In February, Adel Bakawan, a Franco-Iranian specialist in Islamic extremism, said that the Islamic State is regrouping and is planning a mass casualty attack in ‘Berlin, London or Paris’. This week Thibault de Montbrial, president of the Centre for Reflection on Homeland Security, spoke in similar terms during a radio interview.
While Isis, or the Islamic State, no longer has a caliphate as it did between 2014 and 2019, it still has many fanatical followers scattered in Iraq, Syria and Afghanistan. Referencing a report written by the Dutch intelligence services in May, de Montbrial said that the Islamic State ‘has already started reintroducing active commando units’ into Europe with the intention of attacking the West.' ............
The Spectator.
The will hardly enter the UK by regular routes will they?
'There is a growing sense of unease in France that a new wave of Islamist terrorism will soon break over Europe. In February, Adel Bakawan, a Franco-Iranian specialist in Islamic extremism, said that the Islamic State is regrouping and is planning a mass casualty attack in ‘Berlin, London or Paris’. This week Thibault de Montbrial, president of the Centre for Reflection on Homeland Security, spoke in similar terms during a radio interview.
While Isis, or the Islamic State, no longer has a caliphate as it did between 2014 and 2019, it still has many fanatical followers scattered in Iraq, Syria and Afghanistan. Referencing a report written by the Dutch intelligence services in May, de Montbrial said that the Islamic State ‘has already started reintroducing active commando units’ into Europe with the intention of attacking the West.' ............
The Spectator.
The will hardly enter the UK by regular routes will they?
@15.11.My company pays out about £500 a week for unskilled labour.A good £100 goes back in taxes.Meanwhile we are paying these folks £10 a day for doing sweet fanny adams.Whats your better option-getting them into meaningful occupation or paying them £10 a day to wander round the streets of Aberdeen.Meanwhile my company is still screaming out for workers.(Skilled or unskilled).
Any one who enters this country without a passport is an illegal immigrant. If they can afford to pay thousands of pounds to smugglers on a small boat, a dangerous ,channel crossing then they should be able to afford an air fare an come here legally. If they haven't got a passport then they should apply to their own countries passport office , and present them selves at British immigration on arrival Trying to sneak in to this country under the radar automatically categorises them as illegal immigrants who are not required here and unwanted.
It is simply false to claim that anyone arriving in this country without a valid passport (and a visa, if required) is an illegal immigrant – if they were, we could simply throw them out as illegal immigrants.
One of the statutory defences (of arriving illegally in the UK) is that the immigration offence was committed as a necessary part of the refugee’s journey to the UK.
As the act of persons arriving illegally in the UK was committed as a necessary part of the refugee’s journey – they have a defence to any claim that they are illegals.
One of the statutory defences (of arriving illegally in the UK) is that the immigration offence was committed as a necessary part of the refugee’s journey to the UK.
As the act of persons arriving illegally in the UK was committed as a necessary part of the refugee’s journey – they have a defence to any claim that they are illegals.
"Presumably if all these immigrants were processed and found to have a legal right to remain in the UK, you would have no complaints – as they would have come here legally."
On the contrary. The focus of the issue would then shift as to why some bunch of hard of thinking authority figures had been so foolish as to decide all the chancers were ok to come in.
Clearly a country had to see an overall benefit to the nation in order to invite someone to stay (or more accurately, to arrive in the first place). Since this nation is already overcrowded then there can be next to no reasons for the authorities to betray the citizens by changing the status of all the illegals to be legitimate. Should they try it then they would need to be brought to book and their erroneous decisions declared invalid.
But I'm sure that was obvious.
On the contrary. The focus of the issue would then shift as to why some bunch of hard of thinking authority figures had been so foolish as to decide all the chancers were ok to come in.
Clearly a country had to see an overall benefit to the nation in order to invite someone to stay (or more accurately, to arrive in the first place). Since this nation is already overcrowded then there can be next to no reasons for the authorities to betray the citizens by changing the status of all the illegals to be legitimate. Should they try it then they would need to be brought to book and their erroneous decisions declared invalid.
But I'm sure that was obvious.
What is the better option - paying them £10 a day for doing nothing...or stopping them coming here at all. Or at worst, they having reached here, sending them back immediately with a flea in their ear. Maybe as compromise, send them far away to a coutry willing to take immigrants so that they are going where they are accepted ?
