Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2023 6:05:09 GMT
I understand that Labour strongly believe that it's a legal requirement to break the law. We can see that by those who sponsor them. However, it is not in good faith, because they're already in a safe country. It's just a case of your superiors twisting something, which obviously didn't account for this, to fulfill their evil ambitions. Sorry, but the people say no, and it's up to a democratic government to address those who seek to abuse the system to benefit organised criminal gangs and other sinister people. You keep saying "they are already in a safe country" knowing full well that this has nothing to do with problem. Whether they are in a safe country or not is by, the by the problem is that they are making an extremely dangerous crossing across the channel to get here and the Tories are 'encouraging' it. By the people, do you mean you and your ilk? A YouGov poll suggests 42% of 'the people' oppose the Rwanda plan while only 27% agree with it. If you were in the same circumstances as those fleeing tyranny you would do the same. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2023 6:09:52 GMT
How does the 'bold' mean I am insulting you. The UK is a signatory to the Refugee Convention. This provides that people seeking asylum are not penalised or prosecuted for entering a country illegally to seek asylum, provided they travel directly to the country in which they seek asylum, present themselves to authorities, and show good cause for their illegal entry. This acknowledges that some people may need to break laws in order to travel to a safe country and seek asylum. Case law in the UK has established that these protections extend to people who claim asylum in good faith, even if their application is rejected, and those who travelled through other safe countries en route to the UK. You…”Anyway - it's clear you can't provide an answer to my question because you feel everyone has the (should have) right to enter the UK - as a i said. Your position is abusive and likely motivated by racism.” Ive made it clear that your ‘ question ‘ was merely an opportunity for you to use a strawman fallacy. You make a false claim that facts equal abusive . You insinuate that I am racist because I post facts . You have nothing but false claims, fallacies and insults to support your non point . Migrants in France are not persecuted. Migrants that use criminal gangs to enter the UK illegally are colluding with criminal gangs. Lying again, I have never said anyone should be allowed to enter the UK. You will not answer the question because you know the answer has to be in the positive and that is at odds with your position. I have not insinuated you are a racist, another lie. The UN convention on asylum seekers is not false. Same crap that has been debunked many times. The are not colluding with criminal gangs they are being exploited because the Tories have closed all legal routes to claim asylum which is their right. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2023 6:13:38 GMT
Kicking out illegal immigrants is sensible. Treating illegal immigrants and genuine asylum seekers as being different, is sensible. Genuine asylum seekers deserve asylum. Illegal economic migrants deserve a seat on the next flight to Rwanda. Kicking out asylum seekers who fail the processing application is sensible and we do that on a daily basis. That depends on who you class as 'illegal'. Agreed. That requires a competent processing system, which we down have for asylum seekers crossing the channel. |
|
|
|
Post by Vinny on Jul 10, 2023 7:13:23 GMT
First kick out people here illegally who are working, haven't sought asylum and haven't been here long. If they suddenly apply having been caught, simple, reject. And then send them to Rwanda.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Jul 10, 2023 7:15:37 GMT
You…”Anyway - it's clear you can't provide an answer to my question because you feel everyone has the (should have) right to enter the UK - as a i said. Your position is abusive and likely motivated by racism.” Ive made it clear that your ‘ question ‘ was merely an opportunity for you to use a strawman fallacy. You make a false claim that facts equal abusive . You insinuate that I am racist because I post facts . You have nothing but false claims, fallacies and insults to support your non point . Migrants in France are not persecuted. Migrants that use criminal gangs to enter the UK illegally are colluding with criminal gangs. Lying again, I have never said anyone should be allowed to enter the UK. You will not answer the question because you know the answer has to be in the positive and that is at odds with your position. I have not insinuated you are a racist, another lie. The UN convention on asylum seekers is not false. Same crap that has been debunked many times. The are not colluding with criminal gangs they are being exploited because the Tories have closed all legal routes to claim asylum which is their right. If you condone migrants who are completely safe using criminal gangs to illegally enter the UK then you must condone anyone to enter the UK. Your were told why you question was a fallacy and irrelevant. claiming that people commit crimes under pressure doesn’t excuse the crime . You insinuated that I was racist ..YOU…” Your position is abusive and likely motivated by racism.”“ ……you are the one who is lying . You have realised that your false claims, dishonesty, lies and fallacies cant support support your non point so you want to pick a fight to conceal it. The migrants in France are not persecuted . The migrants who use criminal gangs to illegally enter the UK criminals. Your false claims, fallacies , insults ( and now your bare faced lies ) can’t refute it. |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Jul 10, 2023 7:18:43 GMT
Migrants who use criminal gangs to enter the UK should be considered default criminal from the time they enter and should be arrested as such.
If there are compelling mitigating circumstances then that should be considered but most of them should be immediately deported if at all possible.
|
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Jul 10, 2023 7:23:40 GMT
Kicking out illegal immigrants is sensible. Treating illegal immigrants and genuine asylum seekers as being different, is sensible. Genuine asylum seekers deserve asylum. Illegal economic migrants deserve a seat on the next flight to Rwanda. Kicking out asylum seekers who fail the processing application is sensible and we do that on a daily basis. That depends on who you class as 'illegal'. Agreed. That requires a competent processing system, which we down have for asylum seekers crossing the channel. There is no way to properly 'process' the claims of people who have taken the simple and inexpensive precaution of ditching their documentation. There is also no way to remove these people even if by some miracle you conclude their claim must be bogus. Put all the facts together and it's clear that your position is to 'let them all in' and create a strong incentive for more to arrive. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2023 7:37:12 GMT
First kick out people here illegally who are working, haven't sought asylum and haven't been here long. If they suddenly apply having been caught, simple, reject. And then send them to Rwanda. Totally agree. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2023 7:45:49 GMT
Lying again, I have never said anyone should be allowed to enter the UK. You will not answer the question because you know the answer has to be in the positive and that is at odds with your position. I have not insinuated you are a racist, another lie. The UN convention on asylum seekers is not false. Same crap that has been debunked many times. The are not colluding with criminal gangs they are being exploited because the Tories have closed all legal routes to claim asylum which is their right. If you condone migrants who are completely safe using criminal gangs to illegally enter the UK then you must condone anyone to enter the UK. Your were told why you question was a fallacy and irrelevant. claiming that people commit crimes under pressure doesn’t excuse the crime . You insinuated that I was racist ..YOU…” Your position is abusive and likely motivated by racism.”“ ……you are the one who is lying . You have realised that your false claims, dishonesty, lies and fallacies cant support support your non point so you want to pick a fight to conceal it. The migrants in France are not persecuted . The migrants who use criminal gangs to illegally enter the UK criminals. Your false claims, fallacies , insults ( and now your bare faced lies ) can’t refute it. I don't condone asylum seekers, see we even call them different names, paying criminal gangs to bring them across the channel but I can see why they would do so considering our government has closed the safe and legal routes they would normally use. There is plenty of cases where case law has said that committing a crime is acceptable, self defence for one. I did not say to anyone "Your position is abusive and likely motivated by racism". you are attributing another posters comments to me. My claim is that asylum seekers have a right to travel to any country and claim asylum is correct. This is a discussion not a fight. The asylum seekers in France are fleeing through France to escape from persecution they are not obliged by law to stay in France. If you can show me evidence of where I am wrong please show me as I have showing you I am right. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2023 7:47:06 GMT
Migrants who use criminal gangs to enter the UK should be considered default criminal from the time they enter and should be arrested as such. If there are compelling mitigating circumstances then that should be considered but most of them should be immediately deported if at all possible. So why are they not arrested? I have been saying that all along, all we need to do is process them. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2023 7:50:36 GMT
Kicking out asylum seekers who fail the processing application is sensible and we do that on a daily basis. That depends on who you class as 'illegal'. Agreed. That requires a competent processing system, which we down have for asylum seekers crossing the channel. There is no way to properly 'process' the claims of people who have taken the simple and inexpensive precaution of ditching their documentation. There is also no way to remove these people even if by some miracle you conclude their claim must be bogus. Put all the facts together and it's clear that your position is to 'let them all in' and create a strong incentive for more to arrive. Another cop out. Border force agents are trained to discover the nationality and identity of asylum seekers if they have 'lost' their documentation. Language, ethnicity, accent, interpreters, biometrics and travel routes are all considered when asylum seekers are processed. Technology is a wonderful thing. |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Jul 10, 2023 7:53:59 GMT
If you condone migrants who are completely safe using criminal gangs to illegally enter the UK then you must condone anyone to enter the UK. Your were told why you question was a fallacy and irrelevant. claiming that people commit crimes under pressure doesn’t excuse the crime . You insinuated that I was racist ..YOU…” Your position is abusive and likely motivated by racism.”“ ……you are the one who is lying . You have realised that your false claims, dishonesty, lies and fallacies cant support support your non point so you want to pick a fight to conceal it. The migrants in France are not persecuted . The migrants who use criminal gangs to illegally enter the UK criminals. Your false claims, fallacies , insults ( and now your bare faced lies ) can’t refute it. I don't condone asylum seekers, see we even call them different names, paying criminal gangs to bring them across the channel but I can see why they would do so considering our government has closed the safe and legal routes they would normally use. There is plenty of cases where case law has said that committing a crime is acceptable, self defence for one. I did not say to anyone "Your position is abusive and likely motivated by racism". you are attributing another posters comments to me. My claim is that asylum seekers have a right to travel to any country and claim asylum is correct. This is a discussion not a fight. The asylum seekers in France are fleeing through France to escape from persecution they are not obliged by law to stay in France. If you can show me evidence of where I am wrong please show me as I have showing you I am right. You are a liar. ukpoliticsdebate.boards.net/post/120583/thread You did say “Your position is abusive and likely motivated by racism” and the link is proof . You condone migrants who are not persecuted paying criminal gangs to illegally enter the Uk . You insult, you lie, you insinuate racism to support a non point…then you post “ This is a discussion not a fight.“ The migrants in France care not persecuted. They collude with criminal gangs to illegally enter the UK . They are criminals and should be seen as such . |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2023 8:05:02 GMT
I don't condone asylum seekers, see we even call them different names, paying criminal gangs to bring them across the channel but I can see why they would do so considering our government has closed the safe and legal routes they would normally use. There is plenty of cases where case law has said that committing a crime is acceptable, self defence for one. I did not say to anyone "Your position is abusive and likely motivated by racism". you are attributing another posters comments to me. My claim is that asylum seekers have a right to travel to any country and claim asylum is correct. This is a discussion not a fight. The asylum seekers in France are fleeing through France to escape from persecution they are not obliged by law to stay in France. If you can show me evidence of where I am wrong please show me as I have showing you I am right. You are a liar. ukpoliticsdebate.boards.net/post/120583/thread You did say “Your position is abusive and likely motivated by racism” and the link is proof . You condone migrants who are not persecuted paying criminal gangs to illegally enter the Uk . You insult, you lie, you insinuate racism to support a non point…then you post “ This is a discussion not a fight.“ The migrants in France care not persecuted. They collude with criminal gangs to illegally enter the UK . They are criminals and should be seen as such . My apologies on that one. If you look at the last 2 lines of that post you will quite clearly see they are at odds with the rest of my post. The quote "Your position is abusive and likely motivated by racism" is an accusation made to me by another poster and I am unsure how it ended up 'tagged' to my reply to you. But I do apologise. |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Jul 10, 2023 8:10:11 GMT
Migrants who use criminal gangs to enter the UK should be considered default criminal from the time they enter and should be arrested as such. If there are compelling mitigating circumstances then that should be considered but most of them should be immediately deported if at all possible. So why are they not arrested? I have been saying that all along, all we need to do is process them. Why are criminals not arrested ? Don’t ask me . |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Jul 10, 2023 8:17:04 GMT
You are a liar. ukpoliticsdebate.boards.net/post/120583/thread You did say “Your position is abusive and likely motivated by racism” and the link is proof . You condone migrants who are not persecuted paying criminal gangs to illegally enter the Uk . You insult, you lie, you insinuate racism to support a non point…then you post “ This is a discussion not a fight.“ The migrants in France care not persecuted. They collude with criminal gangs to illegally enter the UK . They are criminals and should be seen as such . My apologies on that one. If you look at the last 2 lines of that post you will quite clearly see they are at odds with the rest of my post. The quote "Your position is abusive and likely motivated by racism" is an accusation made to me by another poster and I am unsure how it ended up 'tagged' to my reply to you. But I do apologise. Thanks RR . I accept that . |
|
