There is (talk) of immigrants being sent to Rwanda to be processed from as early as next week..
Somehow I can't see it happening.. There will be too much of an outcry from Human Rights..
The good weather is seeing many more visitors to our shores..
Only men are to be sent. The government wants to deter irregular entry, and will process those asylum claims from Rwanda. The hope is it might put off the traffickers.
If we were going to send them a warning, surely Orkney would be a worse option, it is bloody cold there.
Men wearing of frocks comes to mind .. :wink:
What would help is having a legal way to have an asylum claim processed before they ever get here and declaring that any illegal entry is a bar on ever being accepted.
I am pretty much certain that the vast majority entering illegally have no valid claim but if the only way to lodge a claim is to enter illegally, which appears to be the case, then sifting out those genuinely in need becomes next to impossible and the process to determine the illegals and deport them becomes equally difficult.
We should never have got rid of those prison ships we had back in the days of Napoleon.
It works for Australia, they take no notice of global outrage.
Unfortunately we have too many leftie lawyers here for it to work, plus the government's not as strong as the Aussies. The lefties have already started on social media, complaining that in Rwanda 'seekers' are liable to be mistreated. :lipsrsealed:
By making the statement today, is Boris trying to detract from 'Partygate' or is the fact that 600 arrived yesterday (number not confirmed by Home Office) reason for the statement this morning. OR perhaps the demonstration by illegals outside The Holiday Inn in Luton did the trick. They're complaining about the food apparently or lack of it !!!!!
https://twitter.com/i/status/1514526039569051655 QPR football ground where call to prayer was to mark the end of first day of Ramadan.
Meanwhile in Blackburn.....
(https://i.postimg.cc/05VnYn6g/Would-be-Tory-Councillor-in-Blackburn.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10714643/Tiger-Patels-niqab-wearing-wife-bids-Tory-councillor.html
Think that'll do me for today ! :cool: :cool: :cool: :cool:
The PM has made a terrible mistake in announcing it some time before it
comes in, if it ever does.
By announcing it before the system is ready will now speed up the boats
crossing.
Over 100,000 at least this year I bet.
Alex, I wouldn't vote for her, simply because covering her face discriminates against people who are deaf. I manage pretty well when I can see who I'm speaking to, but masks made it difficult. I accepted they were necessary, but the niqab is a personal choice, not a requirement.
Quote from: Flying Bomb on April 14, 2022, 12:17:21 PM
The PM has made a terrible mistake in announcing it some time before it
comes in, if it ever does.
By announcing it before the system is ready will now speed up the boats
crossing.
Over 100,000 at least this year I bet.
I agree.. A stupid mistake in making such an announcement...
The Easter rush will begin.. and I don't mean on the roads...
Quote from: Scrumpy on April 14, 2022, 09:29:51 AM
There is (talk) of immigrants being sent to Rwanda to be processed from as early as next week..
Somehow I can't see it happening.. There will be too much of an outcry from Human Rights..
The good weather is seeing many more visitors to our shores..
Hello Scrumpy,
I agree wholeheartedly it will never happen, all the law firms in Camden, Archway and Islington screaming murder and mounting endless appeals to the ECHR will now be the direction.
The government of course confidently anticipates this response and is indeed reliant upon it's happening. They have no intention of actually setting up in Rwanda at all. These announcements are from within 'Cakeville'
the new dome of truth. They are only intended as a ruse to dump responsibility for failure of this half baked excuse for doing nothing, whilst appearing busy, onto the Immigrant Law industry, of which Keir Starmer is a leading exponent.
Meanwhile a wonderful advert to
'Hurry, Hurry, Hurry, offer must end before Rwanda opens' for the dinghy racketeers, who will be junk mailing the smartphones of Somalia, Eritrea et al, non-stop presently. Result a meltdown demand for places, boosting prices for the inflatable oligarchs and swelling asylum applicants to perhaps 100,000 in 2022.
A very cynical conniption indeed by Patel.
Hi Cassandra. I hope you are well.
I knew it was too good to be true..
They ( Government) have to appear to be doing something about this ongoing problem..
Local elections might have something to do with it.
Quote from: Scrumpy on April 14, 2022, 05:12:53 PM
Hi Cassandra. I hope you are well.
I knew it was too good to be true..
They ( Government) have to appear to be doing something about this ongoing problem..
Local elections might have something to do with it.
I think almost certainly the May elections are foremost in their protracted thoughts at present! I predict many white voters of all parties will abstain, resulting in a very low turnout generally with the Liberal machine sensing gains everywhere. The pollsters seems to suggest Tories stay home in protest for locals, but will turn out for General Elections. Reasoning that a Blue liar is less dangerous to an alliance of Starmer, Davey and Sturgeon.
Perhaps this time the pensioners will just desist completely as I would. At our age there's not much any of them can do to us in whatever time we have left and by contracting out entirely at least a semblance of self respect can prevail.
If a person doesn't vote .. They have no opinions..
None that I would listen to..
Or no worthy choice....
But we have to elect someone..
Otherwise some idiot might get in.. :grin: :grin:
That is pretty much guaranteed whatever action we take. I suspect my own vote in the upcoming locals will be none of the above unless there I see a good protest candidate on the ballot.
I do be so hope that nothing occurs that can in any way of stem these richly deserved tears
(https://gallery.digitalham.co.uk/images/poor_jo.jpg)
I don't know if I'll bother voting this time. The competition here is Labour v Greens. Tories are nowhere, the Lib Dems were damaged by Nick Clegg's role in the Coalition. The last Local election saw the very able Labour councillor defeated by the Greens, mainly because they visibly organise litter picks and foodbank collections.
The libdems secured my everlasting contempt with their denial of democracy which they labelled Bollucks to Brexit. Not that I was any fan of theirs before but I would happily see them wiped from the political landscape after that. Poor Jo :clap:
labour have been quiet of late about their plans to return us to thev european fold i feel its time they were asked the question at the box, so we can once more see starmers 'startled rabbit' impression
Quote from: Cassandra on April 14, 2022, 03:07:59 PM
Hello Scrumpy,
I agree wholeheartedly it will never happen, all the law firms in Camden, Archway and Islington screaming murder and mounting endless appeals to the ECHR will now be the direction.
The government of course confidently anticipates this response and is indeed reliant upon it's happening. They have no intention of actually setting up in Rwanda at all. These announcements are from within 'Cakeville' the new dome of truth. They are only intended as a ruse to dump responsibility for failure of this half baked excuse for doing nothing, whilst appearing busy, onto the Immigrant Law industry, of which Keir Starmer is a leading exponent.
Hi Cassandra,
Please don't take this personally, but do you ever feel very disappointed by the self-serving money-making antics of those in the legal profession who want to try to overturn the policies of the Government.
It infuriates me beyond words as I didn't vote for some bugger in Chambers in Camden to determine Government policy, nor do I wish my taxes to be spent contesting their duplicitous challenges.
If there was public vote I reckon the Rwanda scheme would be supported by an 85% majority as personally I haven't yet spoken to anyone who's against it.
Priti Patel summed it up very well, for me, when she said
"Our compassion may be infinite but our capacity to house people is not.
Every day, putting up people in hotels costs the taxpayer nearly £5 million. This is unfair and unsustainable"
Well said..
Quote from: Scrumpy on April 15, 2022, 08:29:56 AM
Well said..
Thanks, also most of us have the intelligence to realise that the only reason the Camden Chambers don't want immigrants being sent to Rwanda is because every one that gets sent there won't be a money-spinner for the Camden Chambers.
and potential labour voters
I did read that Israel sent/deported a few thousand Africans to Rwanda and most of them, after a few weeks fled to Europe. As much as I'd love it to work, I just can't see it. :hmm:
I thought they would be getting their asylum claims to enter Britain processed there. My interpretation of the latest news item I heard on this was that we would be transporting them to Rwanda and the Rwandan's would accept their claims for asylum there. Much better idea. That will really get the asylum supporters riled :grin:
Even handier the former RAF base in Linton-on-Ouse is taking 500 asylum seekers, just think there's already an airfield there :grin: :grin:
So that's yesterday's influx almost housed I wonder which old air base they'll use for today's...
Quote from: Alex on April 15, 2022, 11:31:59 AM
Even handier the former RAF base in Linton-on-Ouse is taking 500 asylum seekers, just think there's already an airfield there :grin: :grin:
An air base.!!!! Oh No. !!!!!
They will be coming over by the jet load.. !!
They're already arriving by the jet load Scrumpy, main media just won't publish it. In a way it surprises me, why don't the Labour newspapers highlight what's happening ? I mean as a way to get at the Government :hmm:
Because then somebody would ask Starmer what he'd do about it and the answer would only please the Islington crowd.
Quote from: Alex on April 15, 2022, 11:50:23 AM
They're already arriving by the jet load Scrumpy, main media just won't publish it. In a way it surprises me, why don't the Labour newspapers highlight what's happening ? I mean as a way to get at the Government :hmm:
'They are already arriving by the jet load'.
You are only saying that to scare me.. :cry: :cry:
It's true Scrumpy, honest :smiley:
On the mother ship I used to post the numbers every day, but people got fed up of reading about it I think. What's that saying about for evil to flourish, it only takes good men to do nothing - or something like that.
Quote from: Alex on April 15, 2022, 12:05:33 PM
but people got fed up of reading about it I think
So what? There is no rule says you can't post something you believe is important. If people don't want to read it they don't have to. If they complain remind them there is nothing in the forum rules says people have to read all the posts.
Mind you I gave up posting about the BS I felt that lockdowns were as nobody wanted to hear that. It is slowly becoming mainstream now though.
Quote from: Alex on April 15, 2022, 12:05:33 PM
It's true Scrumpy, honest :smiley:
On the mother ship I used to post the numbers every day, but people got fed up of reading about it I think. What's that saying about for evil to flourish, it only takes good men to do nothing - or something like that.
Alex... Have you informed the Government of your findings.. ?
No, but the man I quote has :grin:
Quote from: Diasi on April 15, 2022, 08:24:00 AM
Hi Cassandra,
Please don't take this personally, but do you ever feel very disappointed by the self-serving money-making antics of those in the legal profession who want to try to overturn the policies of the Government.
It infuriates me beyond words as I didn't vote for some bugger in Chambers in Camden to determine Government policy, nor do I wish my taxes to be spent contesting their duplicitous challenges.
If there was public vote I reckon the Rwanda scheme would be supported by an 85% majority as personally I haven't yet spoken to anyone who's against it.
Priti Patel summed it up very well, for me, when she said "Our compassion may be infinite but our capacity to house people is not.
Every day, putting up people in hotels costs the taxpayer nearly £5 million. This is unfair and unsustainable"
Diasi, good day out there, I always welcome your cogent responses with interest and respect. I apologise for a lengthy response but your question I felt deserved a reasoned and considered reply?
From the early nineties from both sides of the bench I witnessed an oncoming tide of ethnically Asian, junior solicitors into our trade. Many inspired by suggesting everyone who doesn't point east on a Friday is a racist. They seemed content to believe the UK was just a giant grow bag for their faith and ultimately the rule of Sharia law. Not predominantly, but as a prevailing undercurrent, there was a growing resentment towards not only our legal system, but to it's very administration.
Gradually a silent core within my profession became to recognise that the logic of debate was being traduced by the disproportionate redaction of expression that was increasingly being officially impressed upon argument confirming self evident facts of the wrong inflection. For example
(and not exhaustive in singularity) in the recent grooming /sexual exploitation case in South Yorkshire, all the convicted were ethnic Asians from one religion.
Initially the Police were afraid to prosecute, fearful of racist criticism and some lawyers similarly predisposed to prosecute, frightened as being cast as bigots and falling victim to physical retribution. At best, to being cancelled as barristers, by the exponential growth of ethnic solicitor practices from within this sector of population. The expansion of the Woke as influencers within today's highly organised, digital platforms results in 'De Facto' change, where majorative opinion is falsely suppressed by a noisy minority.
Politicians are mainly tarts who will variantly opine for their wretched votes. Meanwhile those from the left, have free reign to 'banner' their proclamations whilst those who represent the opinions of the silent majority are denied audience by a combination of those primarily motivated by how many likes or followers they can gain on these platforms.
Personally I'm all for the changes that Patel has belatedly thrown in a few weeks before the council elections. However they are practically inept.
To enlarge how I occupy this position I would immediately withdraw us unconditionally from the ECHR.
(European CONVENTION of Human Rights). Likewise but even more pertinent the 'Refugee Convention of 1951' where articles 5 and 31 in particular are 'open goal' sources for the immigrant industry fuelled Law Firms to endlessly issue 'ex parte' restrictive injunctions upon the Home Office.
It is upon these criteria of statute that I opine in my posts why Patel's contrivances are no more than political shenanigans, doomed as she well knows to inoperative impossibility Designed for staunching the haemorrage of frustrated voters,
(see May 5th elections) who desire judicial review and governmental action enabling us to act independent from the shackles of international agreements above, whose principals of incorporation are now so long outdated.
The UK could introduce it's own 'Bill of Human rights'. We are by character a nation of fair minded and generous people, well capable of rescheduling our own legislation. We could also maybe promote many others within our new sphere of influence free from the didactic shackles of the EU to follow suit.
None of this will ever happen. Too many Jeremy Hunt, Theresa May lefty, remainer Tories, who would block it and that's without the House of Lords overloaded with 'lefty-look' members.
sadly, that is the way of the world - or rather, of this country
MIke
Some would be migrants interviewed in Calais said they would stay on France rather than risk being sent to Rwanda. A group of Sudanese men told of their fear of being killed if they are sent to Rwanda. 'We came from Africa – we don't want to go back,' said Mohammed Noor, 34. 'Nobody wants to go to Rwanda. If I go, I will finish my life. In Rwanda I won't get a good life. I have come here for Europe and for the UK.'
Perhaps Priti's plan will work as a deterrent, but only if those sat at Calais SEE that illegals are actually sent to Rwanda.
I can't see it happening to be honest. It's just political gesturing and the courts won't permit it. We need our own big offshiore island to send them all to along with some tents, sleeping bags and rabbit snares.
Quote from: Alex on April 23, 2022, 09:28:54 AM
Some would be migrants interviewed in Calais said they would stay on France rather than risk being sent to Rwanda. A group of Sudanese men told of their fear of being killed if they are sent to Rwanda. 'We came from Africa – we don't want to go back,' said Mohammed Noor, 34. 'Nobody wants to go to Rwanda. If I go, I will finish my life. In Rwanda I won't get a good life. I have come here for Europe and for the UK.'
Perhaps Priti's plan will work as a deterrent, but only if those sat at Calais SEE that illegals are actually sent to Rwanda.
That's the reason Mohammed Noor came to the UK, not because he was fleeing war because he wants a better life, from the horses mouth. With the endless arrivals of these people nobody will have a decent life. If he wants to end his life rather than go to Rwanda I couldn't care less.
being honest 'they' simply remind me of the exodus of humanity from these shores in the fifties, to Australia Canada and the good old USA... plus of course the hoards, from Scotland and Ireland that still trickle towards London ect...
This can't be true can it :?:
Mutiny on Rwanda deal: Home Office staff plot to sabotage migrants plan as some threaten to go on STRIKE over 'totally unethical' proposal to ship asylum-seekers overseas.
Quote from: Cassandra on April 15, 2022, 04:19:56 PM
Diasi, good day out there, I always welcome your cogent responses with interest and respect. I apologise for a lengthy response but your question I felt deserved a reasoned and considered reply?
From the early nineties from both sides of the bench I witnessed an oncoming tide of ethnically Asian, junior solicitors into our trade. Many inspired by suggesting everyone who doesn't point east on a Friday is a racist. They seemed content to believe the UK was just a giant grow bag for their faith and ultimately the rule of Sharia law. Not predominantly, but as a prevailing undercurrent, there was a growing resentment towards not only our legal system, but to it's very administration.
Gradually a silent core within my profession became to recognise that the logic of debate was being traduced by the disproportionate redaction of expression that was increasingly being officially impressed upon argument confirming self evident facts of the wrong inflection. For example (and not exhaustive in singularity) in the recent grooming /sexual exploitation case in South Yorkshire, all the convicted were ethnic Asians from one religion.
Initially the Police were afraid to prosecute, fearful of racist criticism and some lawyers similarly predisposed to prosecute, frightened as being cast as bigots and falling victim to physical retribution. At best, to being cancelled as barristers, by the exponential growth of ethnic solicitor practices from within this sector of population. The expansion of the Woke as influencers within today's highly organised, digital platforms results in 'De Facto' change, where majorative opinion is falsely suppressed by a noisy minority.
Politicians are mainly tarts who will variantly opine for their wretched votes. Meanwhile those from the left, have free reign to 'banner' their proclamations whilst those who represent the opinions of the silent majority are denied audience by a combination of those primarily motivated by how many likes or followers they can gain on these platforms.
Personally I'm all for the changes that Patel has belatedly thrown in a few weeks before the council elections. However they are practically inept.
To enlarge how I occupy this position I would immediately withdraw us unconditionally from the ECHR. (European CONVENTION of Human Rights). Likewise but even more pertinent the 'Refugee Convention of 1951' where articles 5 and 31 in particular are 'open goal' sources for the immigrant industry fuelled Law Firms to endlessly issue 'ex parte' restrictive injunctions upon the Home Office.
It is upon these criteria of statute that I opine in my posts why Patel's contrivances are no more than political shenanigans, doomed as she well knows to inoperative impossibility Designed for staunching the haemorrage of frustrated voters, (see May 5th elections) who desire judicial review and governmental action enabling us to act independent from the shackles of international agreements above, whose principals of incorporation are now so long outdated.
The UK could introduce it's own 'Bill of Human rights'. We are by character a nation of fair minded and generous people, well capable of rescheduling our own legislation. We could also maybe promote many others within our new sphere of influence free from the didactic shackles of the EU to follow suit.
None of this will ever happen. Too many Jeremy Hunt, Theresa May lefty, remainer Tories, who would block it and that's without the House of Lords overloaded with 'lefty-look' members.
Hi Cassandra, many thanks for your comprehesive reply.
I too have come to think that it may come to nothing, but I'd also think it unfair if Priti Patel got the blame for it coming to nothing due to the duplicitous actions of others.
Quote from: Diasi on April 23, 2022, 03:56:46 PM
Hi Cassandra, many thanks for your comprehesive reply.
I too have come to think that it may come to nothing, but I'd also think it unfair if Priti Patel got the blame for it coming to nothing due to the duplicitous actions of others.
Absolutely and it could work well too. I think Patel is a trier, within a hostile Ministry. Meanwhile Johnson and co, the two faced schemers supposedly support her. Hoping the ECHR and Refugee Act 1951, plus The Guardian, BBC, Ch4, ITV, God in Canterbury etc will connive to get them off the hook with the Woke by condemning her attempts as racist.
I'm assuming this is correct :cool:
https://facts4eu.org/news/2022_apr_globalist_hypocrisy
typical of the EU - as it the fact that 10 EU nations, but predominantly Germany and France, have sold arms to Russia, despite the EU embargo in 2014 after Russia annexed the Crimea
Mike
Bigotry and Hypocrisy the founding fathers of the European Union ...
and still going strong
Quote from: crabbyob on April 23, 2022, 10:12:26 AM
being honest 'they' simply remind me of the exodus of humanity from these shores in the fifties, to Australia Canada and the good old USA... plus of course the hoards, from Scotland and Ireland that still trickle towards London ect...
Yes. Moving for opportunities, just as several of my family members did. But they did it legally, £10 Poms etc. Just as there are legal routes, via a variety of visas, to come to the UK.