Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 29, 2023 6:19:25 GMT
Surely anyone who is entering the country illegally is committing a crime? If so why are they not arrested? |
|
|
|
Post by johnofgwent on Apr 29, 2023 6:23:09 GMT
But Braverman didn't actually say that. She was talkin about the people arriving (illegally) in the small boats. Most of these people are economic migrants since they're mainly coming from France which is a safe country. In fact they've probably been turned down for asylum in France because they're not eligible. And most of the Albanians are coming here to join the black economy and many have already been deported from the Uk previously - why else would they pay thousands to people smugglers if they could just get a visitors visa and come her on scheduled flight for a peanuts. Braverman was dead right - it's about time someone in govt pointed out the truth. It's just surprising that anyone has the cheek to say she's wrong. People arriving here in small boats are, for the most part, asylum seekers. Those of us who spent any time working in France in the days of the Sangatte shit hole know EXACTLY what the people milling round in gangs trying to break into lorries were and ‘in genuine fear of persecution for their protected characteristics’ wasn’t remotely one of them. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 29, 2023 6:24:20 GMT
Surely anyone who is entering the country illegally is committing a crime? Quick check brings up these Immigration offences Individuals and organised groups may commit a variety of offences when gaining or facilitating illegal entry into the UK. Some of the commonly prosecuted immigration offences are: Entering the UK without leave contrary to section 24 Immigration Act 1971 Assisting unlawful immigration to a Member State or the UK contrary to section 25 of the 1971 Act Possession of false identification documents with improper intention contrary to section 4 Identity Documents Act 2010 Entering the UK without a passport contrary to section 2 Asylum and Immigration (Treatment of Claimants, etc.) Act 2004 PS I found this interesting and informative www.ein.org.uk/blog/crimes-arrival-nationality-and-borders-bill First paragraph. "The Nationality and Borders Bill further criminalises people coming to the UK to seek asylum. It does so by switching the emphasis from 'entering' the UK to 'arriving' in the UK. The difference is significant. Together with a combination of other powers, it means that people can be stopped from crossing the English Channel in small boats and turned away for criminal behaviour. If by luck they land on the English coastline, they can be prosecuted. But many such people will be asylum seekers, with a right to come to the UK and seek asylum. The proposal ignores the provision of the Refugee Convention (Article 31) that prohibits penalties being imposed on Refugees who enter or are present in a country without authorisation. The result is incompatible with UK international commitments". If the Tories want to leave all the international agencies that decide on what can and cannot happen, they should do so and spell out what they want but they wont do that because it would put us in the same 'club' as some rather nasty countries. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Apr 29, 2023 6:24:57 GMT
Surely anyone who is entering the country illegally is committing a crime? If so why are they not arrested? If they are claiming asylum they are protected from any penalty for their crime whilst that claim is being assessed. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 29, 2023 7:15:12 GMT
Surely anyone who is entering the country illegally is committing a crime? If so why are they not arrested? Why keep ansking a question that already has been answered? Tedious. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 29, 2023 7:16:35 GMT
Is that so, well when we start sending you the other way, lets see if the French decide if you are illegal or not. What does that even mean? Don't you understand sheep? I'll explain. Try rocking up on a French beach with a rubber dinghy without any documents and see how you get on with the Gendarmerie. |
|
|
|
Post by steppenwolf on Apr 29, 2023 7:32:28 GMT
But Braverman didn't actually say that. She was talkin about the people arriving (illegally) in the small boats. Most of these people are economic migrants since they're mainly coming from France which is a safe country. In fact they've probably been turned down for asylum in France because they're not eligible. And most of the Albanians are coming here to join the black economy and many have already been deported from the Uk previously - why else would they pay thousands to people smugglers if they could just get a visitors visa and come her on scheduled flight for a peanuts. Braverman was dead right - it's about time someone in govt pointed out the truth. It's just surprising that anyone has the cheek to say she's wrong. People arriving here in small boats are, for the most part, asylum seekers. No they're not. They don't fit the demographic for asylum seekers for a start - they're mainly young men. They've also mainly thrown away their ID. Many come from Albania - in fact for a while most of them were from Albania. Many also come India and Pakistan - who will eventually be at each other throats like they are in India and Pakistan. The number of genuine asylum seekers are minimal - and they're not eligible for asylum because they're coming from a safe country. |
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Apr 29, 2023 7:48:02 GMT
@red Rackham: The source you cite is rubbish. I dealt with it in a lengthy piece on PFUK when Patman Post attempted to use in it as the basis for an anti-Powell diatribe.
I still have the entire dialogue on file and can post it here if necessary. This is how it begins:
"I have started this new thread to deal with a matter raised by Prosthetic Conscience in the thread ‘The Windrush Generation’. It concerns the record of Enoch Powell as Minister of Health in the Macmillan government and, specfically, the claim that while at the MoH Powell ‘actively encouraged’ or as PC puts it ‘recruited’ colonial workers to come to work in the NHS.
What follows is the text of a dialogue with ‘Patman Post’ a prolific contributor of BAME origin to the now-defunct British Democracy Forum. The linkage between PP and PC is that they both rely on the same source as providing proof that the government ‘actively invited’ colonial migrants, and in particular the ‘Windrush Generation’. There are other similarities too leading to speculation that PP and PC may be one and the same in particular the hostile and aggressive manner towards anyone with the temerity to question the utility of the multiracial state. Enquiries are ongoing.
As well as providing illumination into the true story of Powell’s activities at the MoH I hope it will also provide some valuable pointers to some here on the selection of appropriate and credible sources – which should be primary wherever possible - as well as the their critical interpretation..."
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 29, 2023 7:52:51 GMT
What does that even mean? Don't you understand sheep? I'll explain. Try rocking up on a French beach with a rubber dinghy without any documents and see how you get on with the Gendarmerie. Why would I want to do that? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 29, 2023 7:53:47 GMT
If so why are they not arrested? If they are claiming asylum they are protected from any penalty for their crime whilst that claim is being assessed. So they are not committing an offence and should not be called illegal. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 29, 2023 7:55:22 GMT
If so why are they not arrested? Why keep ansking a question that already has been answered? Tedious. I was asking a question of 'another' poster who still believes they are 'illegal'. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 29, 2023 7:58:00 GMT
People arriving here in small boats are, for the most part, asylum seekers. No they're not. They don't fit the demographic for asylum seekers for a start - they're mainly young men. They've also mainly thrown away their ID. Many come from Albania - in fact for a while most of them were from Albania. Many also come India and Pakistan - who will eventually be at each other throats like they are in India and Pakistan. The number of genuine asylum seekers are minimal - and they're not eligible for asylum because they're coming from a safe country. Young men are the biggest threat to those carrying out atrocities and are therefore the most vulnerable. We do not know if the have thrown away their ID or had it taken or did not have time to find it, you are making the same right wing assumption as others. |
|
|
|
Post by steppenwolf on Apr 29, 2023 8:15:57 GMT
No they're not. They don't fit the demographic for asylum seekers for a start - they're mainly young men. They've also mainly thrown away their ID. Many come from Albania - in fact for a while most of them were from Albania. Many also come India and Pakistan - who will eventually be at each other throats like they are in India and Pakistan. The number of genuine asylum seekers are minimal - and they're not eligible for asylum because they're coming from a safe country. Young men are the biggest threat to those carrying out atrocities and are therefore the most vulnerable. We do not know if the have thrown away their ID or had it taken or did not have time to find it, you are making the same right wing assumption as others.
Nearly all of them have no passport. They're told by the people smugglers to get rid of them. Of course if they have a valid passport that shows that they're coming from a "war-torn" country it would be sensible to present it when they land. The fact that they don't leads to only one conclusion. They're almost certainly not legitimate asylum seekers. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 29, 2023 8:37:04 GMT
Young men are the biggest threat to those carrying out atrocities and are therefore the most vulnerable. We do not know if the have thrown away their ID or had it taken or did not have time to find it, you are making the same right wing assumption as others.
Nearly all of them have no passport. They're told by the people smugglers to get rid of them. Of course if they have a valid passport that shows that they're coming from a "war-torn" country it would be sensible to present it when they land. The fact that they don't leads to only one conclusion. They're almost certainly not legitimate asylum seekers. You will believe anything. If that is the case why do we have such a high rate of accepting asylum seekers when they are processed, which of course the Tories are not doing? These people leave their homes with nothing and run. |
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Apr 29, 2023 8:40:19 GMT
Actually only a few percent of the asylum seekers who arrived by small boat have had their claims decided, the rest are in the backlog (currently around 160,000)
|
|
