Rwanda.. here we come..!!

[Scrumpy]

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

'They are already arriving by the jet load'.

You are only saying that to scare me.. 

[Alex]

It's true Scrumpy, honest 
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.

[klondike]

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.

[Scrumpy]

It's true Scrumpy, honest 
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.. ?

[Alex]

No, but the man I quote has 

[Cassandra]

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.

[Michael Rolls]

sadly, that is the way of the world - or rather, of this country
MIke

[Alex]

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.

[klondike]

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.

[Jacqueline]

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.

[crabbyob]

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...

[Alex]

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.

[Diasi]

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.

[Cassandra]

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.

[Alex]

I'm assuming this is correct

https://facts4eu.org/news/2022_apr_globalist_hypocrisy