Acid Attack

Started by Alex, February 01, 2024, 10:16:28 PM

« previous - next »

Alex

With depressing predictability, the acid attacker is reportedly an ex asylum seeker, whose claim failed twice before he was finally granted leave to remain.   

klondike


muddy

The attack was horrific those poor little children .
I think that any asylum seeker should be deported immediately they commit a serious offence .
This man had already committed one sex attack .

JBR

Quote from: muddy on February 01, 2024, 11:22:12 PMThe attack was horrific those poor little children .
I think that any asylum seeker should be deported immediately they commit a serious offence .
This man had already committed one sex attack .

Sadly, once here never to leave.  It's as if our glorious leaders actually intend to completely ruin the country.
Numquam credere Gallicum

Michael Rolls

well, they are certainly succeeding!
Thank you for the days, the days you gave me
[email protected]

muddy

#5
I hope when they find him they shoot him dead .
As they should have done the Nottingham murderer .

Scrumpy


Alas.. they will not.. He is just a small fish in a big , big pond..
Don't ask me.. I know nuffink..

muddy

Acid attacks are on the rise in the U.K. 
These are attacks that always target women and are done from people or communities who are from third world brutal cultures 

klondike

Quote from: Michael Rolls on February 02, 2024, 05:32:00 AMwell, they are certainly succeeding!
It's the only thing they are showing any success at all with.

JBR

Quote from: muddy on February 02, 2024, 09:45:02 AMAcid attacks are on the rise in the U.K.
These are attacks that always target women and are done from people or communities who are from third world brutal cultures
All part of the inevitable change in our country.  It is depressing.

Other unrelated things too.  I read this morning about our intention to send HMS White Elephant to relieve the US aircraft carrier in the Gulf when it is sent home.  Just one or two little niggles, though.  We only have eight aircraft which can fly from her, we can't send enough destroyers and support vessels to accompany her, and we have nothing much else to help in any way.  So she and her sister ship will continue to bob about in Southampton or around and close to our coast!

Our glorious leaders have talked about it, but it ain't going to happen!  Mark my words.
Numquam credere Gallicum

Michael Rolls

those carriers are supposed to have 36 F-35s each -instead 8 between them. Talk about white elephants is just about right.
Thank you for the days, the days you gave me
[email protected]

JBR

Quote from: Michael Rolls on February 02, 2024, 10:55:58 AMthose carriers are supposed to have 36 F-35s each -instead 8 between them. Talk about white elephants is just about right.
That's correct.
And another shortcoming, to save a bob or two, by our politicians was not to include cats and traps so that a wider range of aircraft could be used.
Naturally, to install them now would cost several times the amount it would have been to have them when the ships were built.
Talk about incompetent politicians.
Ever since Maggie was stabbed in the back.
Numquam credere Gallicum

klondike

#12
Those two carriers are the reason the navy has been cut down so much. They have the carriers but they cannot be used.

One way one could be possibly used would be to replace the US carrier only. Rely on the US carrier support vessels and let the US fly their planes from it. Not sure how practical it would be though. Are US and UK operational procedures close enough that that could be made to work without months or years of cross training?

Michael Rolls

at the time I was appalled - and still am - at the lack of cats and traps - talk about short sighted!
Thank you for the days, the days you gave me
[email protected]

Ruthio

Quote from: muddy on February 02, 2024, 07:08:15 AMI hope when they find him they shoot him dead .
As they should have done the Nottingham murderer .
From today's Knowledge


Asylum law favours criminals over victimsThere's something truly idiotic about the coverage of the Clapham chemical attack, says Rod Liddle in The Sunday Times.
The attacker, Abdul Shokoor Ezedi, arrived here illegally from Afghanistan in 2016, in the back of a lorry. He applied twice for asylum and was turned down on both occasions.
Then, in 2018, he was convicted of sexual assault and indecent exposure, and received two suspended prison sentences. Somehow – possibly because he convinced a priest he'd converted to Christianity – his third asylum application succeeded.
And last week this "barbaric, medieval pervert" travelled from his taxpayer-funded home in Newcastle to south London, and threw an alkaline corrosive liquid over a woman and her young daughters.
Newspapers and MPs say they are "surprised, shocked even", that Ezedi was still freely roaming the streets of Britain. But where did they expect him to be?
As anyone who reads the papers must know by now, pretty much no one can be deported from this country because we are hemmed in by legislation that has "not the slightest respect or sympathy for the victims of crime". So it's impossible to boot out illegal immigrants from the Caribbean who are also drug dealers and rapists; or send economic migrants who wash up on the shores of Dover to Rwanda; or force Ezedi back to Afghanistan, even though, given his misogyny, "he might fit in very well".
By pretending there isn't a problem, polite liberals "prop up a system that allows the innocent to be maimed", and ensure we have no way to get rid of those who "hate us but wish to live here".