|
|
Post by johnofgwent on Apr 14, 2024 15:13:50 GMT
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-68809947Here we fucking go again When i obtained registered charity status in 1990 for the school PTA so it could recover Gift Aid the charity commission documents sent to me as PTA Treasurer made it clear interference in government policy was regarded as incompatible with charitable status Why the fuck then are ‘Charities’ allowed to act to block government policy ? Engage lawyers all you like, but you should forfeit your charitable status and any tax perks if you do. That is the route Amnesty International took. These interfering buggers should follow that example or be penalised
|
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Apr 14, 2024 15:25:12 GMT
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-68809947Here we fucking go again When i obtained registered charity status in 1990 for the school PTA so it could recover Gift Aid the charity commission documents sent to me as PTA Treasurer made it clear interference in government policy was regarded as incompatible with charitable status Why the fuck then are ‘Charities’ allowed to act to block government policy ? Engage lawyers all you like, but you should forfeit your charitable status and any tax perks if you do. That is the route Amnesty International took. These interfering buggers should follow that example or be penalised It seems the rules now permit just about any political pressure group or what they call a political think tank etc to become a charity. The catch all seems to be it benefits people educationally, e.g. medical advice on AIDS given to homosexuals or some such excuse for a political organisations designed to promote homosexuals and take those to court who dare do anything to upset them, and you could use the same formula for blacks, feminists, transvestites and whatever you make up. Preventing discrimination is another good ruse if you like clamping down on opposing political view on Twitter. |
|
|
|
Post by patman post on Apr 14, 2024 16:53:25 GMT
Rwanda has experienced more UK Home Secretary visits than the UK has transported immigrants to that country.
This current inept UK government has also paid Rwanda millions for supposedly preparing to receive those transported by the UK, but for what, exactly?
Wouldn’t that time, effort and money have been better spent working with other nations and organisations looking for solutions to the current mass migrations of populations around the globe…?
|
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Apr 14, 2024 17:11:56 GMT
Rwanda has experienced more UK Home Secretary visits than the UK has transported immigrants to that country. This current inept UK government has also paid Rwanda millions for supposedly preparing to receive those transported by the UK, but for what, exactly? Wouldn’t that time, effort and money have been better spent working with other nations and organisations looking for solutions to the current mass migrations of populations around the globe…? I think this is like a pilot scheme. Stage one is make sure you gen get the blighters on a plane and in the country without the whole shithouse going up in flames. If we can get it to work we can learn from that experience and use it as a basis to do it in other countries. I think we will have to leave the ECHR personally. Those judges don't take a hint or have any idea about reality. |
|
|
|
Post by patman post on Apr 14, 2024 17:23:34 GMT
Rwanda has experienced more UK Home Secretary visits than the UK has transported immigrants to that country. This current inept UK government has also paid Rwanda millions for supposedly preparing to receive those transported by the UK, but for what, exactly? Wouldn’t that time, effort and money have been better spent working with other nations and organisations looking for solutions to the current mass migrations of populations around the globe…? I think this is like a pilot scheme. Stage one is make sure you gen get the blighters on a plane and in the country without the whole shithouse going up in flames. If we can get it to work we can learn from that experience and use it as a basis to do it in other countries. I think we will have to leave the ECHR personally. Those judges don't take a hint or have any idea about reality. What other countries (or even Rwanda) will want to do business with the UK if it withdraws from international agreements? Just because the Courts find against certain UK actions, that’s no reason to pull out of the internationally agreed convention… ps — at least one peddled example of ridiculous court rulings was the supposed stay of deportation because of a pet cat that proved to be untrue… |
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Apr 14, 2024 18:18:33 GMT
I think this is like a pilot scheme. Stage one is make sure you gen get the blighters on a plane and in the country without the whole shithouse going up in flames. If we can get it to work we can learn from that experience and use it as a basis to do it in other countries. I think we will have to leave the ECHR personally. Those judges don't take a hint or have any idea about reality. What other countries (or even Rwanda) will want to do business with the UK if it withdraws from international agreements? Just because the Courts find against certain UK actions, that’s no reason to pull out of the internationally agreed convention… ps — at least one peddled example of ridiculous court rulings was the supposed stay of deportation because of a pet cat that proved to be untrue… Genetically test them and then match to country. You can sometimes locate origin to a particular village with some primitive cultures. They will be happiest with their fellow people. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Apr 14, 2024 21:08:24 GMT
I think this is like a pilot scheme. Stage one is make sure you gen get the blighters on a plane and in the country without the whole shithouse going up in flames. If we can get it to work we can learn from that experience and use it as a basis to do it in other countries. I think we will have to leave the ECHR personally. Those judges don't take a hint or have any idea about reality. What other countries (or even Rwanda) will want to do business with the UK if it withdraws from international agreements? Just because the Courts find against certain UK actions, that’s no reason to pull out of the internationally agreed convention… ps — at least one peddled example of ridiculous court rulings was the supposed stay of deportation because of a pet cat that proved to be untrue… As I recall the cat was part of the, judgement. If the judge did not consider it it should not have been mentioned. If the judge was being flippant then that is an issue with the judge. |
|
