| The clown 19:35 - Oct 5 with 16354 views | saint22 |
Just watched BoJo interviewed on C4 news
Good god could anyone be anymore unconvincing!?
Contradicting himself, stumbling and humbling answers and banging on about people want a government that performs for them! As if they haven’t been in power for 11 years
How the hell do people fall for his ineptitude
Oh and there is no labour shortage at all that’s just due to lack of investment
Ffs |  | | |  |
| The clown on 22:14 - Nov 26 with 1197 views | JaySaint |
| The clown on 22:12 - Nov 26 by Sadoldgit |
No they are not. Once again, it is not illegal to enter a country to seek asylum. 98% of those who cross the Channel seek asylum. |
You are ignoring the fact they (IAW EU law), are not Asylum Seekers when they have landed within a safe EU country (ie, any part of the EU). This is the word of your beloved EU. Other people fleeing have legally been resettled in the UK via this route [Post edited 26 Nov 2021 22:16]
| |
| |
| The clown on 22:17 - Nov 26 with 1182 views | Sadoldgit |
| The clown on 22:14 - Nov 26 by JaySaint |
You are ignoring the fact they (IAW EU law), are not Asylum Seekers when they have landed within a safe EU country (ie, any part of the EU). This is the word of your beloved EU. Other people fleeing have legally been resettled in the UK via this route [Post edited 26 Nov 2021 22:16]
|
This from the Amnesty Internal page
Who is an asylum-seeker?
An asylum-seeker is a person who has left their country and is seeking protection from persecution and serious human rights violations in another country, but who hasn’t yet been legally recognized as a refugee and is waiting to receive a decision on their asylum claim. Seeking asylum is a human right. This means everyone should be allowed to enter another country to seek asylum. |  | | |
| The clown on 22:20 - Nov 26 with 1173 views | Sadoldgit |
This from a fact finder page
WHAT WAS CLAIMED
If you come to the UK illegally, you are an illegal migrant, and I’m afraid the law will treat you as such.
OUR VERDICT
Not in all cases. Specifically, refugees seeking asylum in the UK can’t be penalised for entering illegally if they are claiming asylum and coming from a place where their life or freedom are threatened. They may also stop over in other “safe” countries en route to the UK. | | | |
| The clown on 22:24 - Nov 26 with 1170 views | JaySaint |
| The clown on 22:20 - Nov 26 by Sadoldgit |
This from a fact finder page
WHAT WAS CLAIMED
If you come to the UK illegally, you are an illegal migrant, and I’m afraid the law will treat you as such.
OUR VERDICT
Not in all cases. Specifically, refugees seeking asylum in the UK can’t be penalised for entering illegally if they are claiming asylum and coming from a place where their life or freedom are threatened. They may also stop over in other “safe” countries en route to the UK. |
They are legally coming from France. The EU recognises that once they enter the EU, they are deemed safe. You can twist it as much as you like. This is the legal standpoint | |
| |
| The clown on 22:36 - Nov 26 with 1145 views | saint68 |
| The clown on 20:08 - Nov 26 by Sadoldgit |
So they can speak the language of the country they want to relocate to. You don’t like asylum seekers do you? Think yourself lucky you don’t live in some of the hell holes that these people are escaping from. |
Hell holes could aptly describe the areas of France that police no longer patrol due to extreme prejudice against them from their inhabitants..that funnily enough are immigrants that don't wish to assimilate...you have dodged this bullet all day..you make out that immigration is a right...well I definitely don't disagree at all with that fundamentally Sogs..however I would 100% recognise that integration and respect for the values and traditions of that country were met and complied with out of decency. | |
| |
| The clown on 22:39 - Nov 26 with 1153 views | Sadoldgit |
| The clown on 22:24 - Nov 26 by JaySaint |
They are legally coming from France. The EU recognises that once they enter the EU, they are deemed safe. You can twist it as much as you like. This is the legal standpoint |
I’m not twisting it. More from the same source dealing with a quote from Johnson (to get the thread back on track).
In reference to migrants attempting to cross the Channel to get from France to the UK, Boris Johnson said “If you come illegally, you are an illegal migrant, and I’m afraid the law will treat you as such.”
This is not correct in all cases.
Although it’s certainly true that crossing the Channel without authorisation isn’t a legal way to enter the UK, Article 31 of the UN Refugee Convention states that refugees cannot be penalised for entering the country illegally to claim asylum if they are “coming directly from a territory where their life or freedom was threatened” provided they “present themselves without delay to the authorities and show good cause for their illegal entry or presence”.
A lot depends here on how to interpret which country people are “coming directly from”. It could be argued, for instance, that as the people crossing the channel are coming directly from France–which is not the country they initially fled–they don’t have the right to claim asylum in the UK.
However, in 1999 a UK judge ruled that “some element of choice is indeed open to refugees as to where they may properly claim asylum.” The judge specified that “any merely short term stopover en route” to another country should not forfeit the individual’s right to claim refugee status elsewhere.
This means people who enter the UK by illegal means can legitimately make a claim for asylum, even after passing through other “safe” countries, provided they do so directly after arriving. | | | |
| The clown on 22:46 - Nov 26 with 1138 views | saint68 |
| The clown on 22:39 - Nov 26 by Sadoldgit |
I’m not twisting it. More from the same source dealing with a quote from Johnson (to get the thread back on track).
In reference to migrants attempting to cross the Channel to get from France to the UK, Boris Johnson said “If you come illegally, you are an illegal migrant, and I’m afraid the law will treat you as such.”
This is not correct in all cases.
Although it’s certainly true that crossing the Channel without authorisation isn’t a legal way to enter the UK, Article 31 of the UN Refugee Convention states that refugees cannot be penalised for entering the country illegally to claim asylum if they are “coming directly from a territory where their life or freedom was threatened” provided they “present themselves without delay to the authorities and show good cause for their illegal entry or presence”.
A lot depends here on how to interpret which country people are “coming directly from”. It could be argued, for instance, that as the people crossing the channel are coming directly from France–which is not the country they initially fled–they don’t have the right to claim asylum in the UK.
However, in 1999 a UK judge ruled that “some element of choice is indeed open to refugees as to where they may properly claim asylum.” The judge specified that “any merely short term stopover en route” to another country should not forfeit the individual’s right to claim refugee status elsewhere.
This means people who enter the UK by illegal means can legitimately make a claim for asylum, even after passing through other “safe” countries, provided they do so directly after arriving. |
The simple,answer is to do as Australia have done..if you enter illegally you will be issued a life time ban and be refused any refugee status..simple yet effective. [Post edited 26 Nov 2021 22:50]
| |
| |
| The clown on 22:56 - Nov 26 with 1138 views | Saintsforeverj |
| The clown on 22:46 - Nov 26 by saint68 |
The simple,answer is to do as Australia have done..if you enter illegally you will be issued a life time ban and be refused any refugee status..simple yet effective. [Post edited 26 Nov 2021 22:50]
|
It's just not acceptable for people to choose to cross the Channel with their kids, with such risk of death, without being stopped. These kids don't have any say in what choice they would.like to make. Putting them in a small boat to their death is totally wrong. People can disagree that they think it's ok to risk kids life like this as they have a right to seek asylum, well.I think it's bad to kill their children. At least try to find a safer way to the country or stay in France. At least their kids won't be killed. A right to travel where you want to, but you severly risk killing your children. That doesn't sound ok to me. [Post edited 26 Nov 2021 22:59]
| |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| The clown on 23:15 - Nov 26 with 1130 views | Bicester_North |
| The clown on 20:16 - Nov 26 by Sadoldgit |
Perhaps you should pop over to France and explain that to them? |
Why would I do that? And you didn’t answer my question which option was preferable. Are you ok? | |
| |
| The clown on 23:53 - Nov 26 with 1119 views | Sadoldgit |
This from the Lancaster University Law School
UK Home Secretary, Priti Patel, has recently revealed that asylum seekers arriving in the UK ‘illegally’, who may have travelled through a ‘safe third country’ to do so, will be liable for removal from the UK at any time (even after they have secured refugee status). But can asylum seekers actually come to the UK ‘illegally’?
The short answer is no, not in the way the Home Secretary has been desperately trying to depict. The idea of the ‘illegal’ asylum seeker is a falsehood that has been actively peddled by the Home Office and the Home Secretary in recent years. When people talk about asylum seekers coming to the UK ‘illegally’, what they really mean is asylum seekers arriving via informal and unofficial routes, such as crossing the Channel via small boat. However, asylum seekers are legally allowed to come to the UK even when making an ‘illegal entry’. As, although it would be illegal for migrants who are not seeking asylum to enter by such means, asylum seekers are entitled to come to the UK via whatever means possible, provided they inform the authorities of their presence upon their arrival and have good reason for seeking asylum. Asylum seekers cannot therefore come to the UK ‘illegally’; illegality may only ever occur if they do not report their presence to the authorities and remain in the UK as undocumented migrants. | | | |
| The clown on 00:00 - Nov 27 with 1113 views | Sadoldgit |
| The clown on 23:15 - Nov 26 by Bicester_North |
Why would I do that? And you didn’t answer my question which option was preferable. Are you ok? |
Because you asked a question of me that has nothing to do with me and everything to do with them. It is not my question to answer. Ask it if the people who are taking the risks. Yes I am fine thanks. Does there have to be something wrong with you to understand that there is a huge problem here that is not being dealt with properly by our PM and Home Secretary? | | | |
| The clown on 00:42 - Nov 27 with 1104 views | Bicester_North |
| The clown on 00:00 - Nov 27 by Sadoldgit |
Because you asked a question of me that has nothing to do with me and everything to do with them. It is not my question to answer. Ask it if the people who are taking the risks. Yes I am fine thanks. Does there have to be something wrong with you to understand that there is a huge problem here that is not being dealt with properly by our PM and Home Secretary? |
Well any f*cking parent that I know unless they are disgusting c*nts would say they would prefer to learn a language than let their kids drown. Why’s that so hard to comprehend? | |
| |
| The clown on 06:41 - Nov 27 with 1062 views | saint68 |
| The clown on 00:42 - Nov 27 by Bicester_North |
Well any f*cking parent that I know unless they are disgusting c*nts would say they would prefer to learn a language than let their kids drown. Why’s that so hard to comprehend? |
He's incapable of answering anything that goes against his rigid belief..wether it be true/false or blatantly biased. | |
| |
| The clown on 06:52 - Nov 27 with 1059 views | saint68 |
| The clown on 22:56 - Nov 26 by Saintsforeverj |
It's just not acceptable for people to choose to cross the Channel with their kids, with such risk of death, without being stopped. These kids don't have any say in what choice they would.like to make. Putting them in a small boat to their death is totally wrong. People can disagree that they think it's ok to risk kids life like this as they have a right to seek asylum, well.I think it's bad to kill their children. At least try to find a safer way to the country or stay in France. At least their kids won't be killed. A right to travel where you want to, but you severly risk killing your children. That doesn't sound ok to me. [Post edited 26 Nov 2021 22:59]
|
I agree mate, you shouldn't be able to cherry pick your preferred destination when seeking safe haven from war or threat to life in your home country.
As for language, that's an irrelevance when fleeing for your life, to be free of any threat is the aim.. | |
| |
| The clown on 09:29 - Nov 27 with 1013 views | Sadoldgit |
| The clown on 00:42 - Nov 27 by Bicester_North |
Well any f*cking parent that I know unless they are disgusting c*nts would say they would prefer to learn a language than let their kids drown. Why’s that so hard to comprehend? |
What on Earth are you talking about? What has learning a language got to do with anything? Migration is a massive problem around the world. We are not alone in dealing with migration but all you can do is pick up on language? Instead of taking your lead from Priti Patel I suggest you listen to those people who deal directly with displaced families.
This from a survey taken from the “jungle” camp at Calais -
12% planned to stay in France
82% planned to go to the UK
52% planned to go to the UK because they have family here.
[Post edited 27 Nov 2021 10:27]
| | | |
| The clown on 10:24 - Nov 27 with 977 views | Bazza |
I would prefer to go to a country that will house you initially in a hotel, pay you benefits, offer free health and education. Certainly a better option than live in a French tent. But would I risk my kids drowning? - no chance.
Awful that the border force boats stay in the harbour when the RNLI volunteers go to the rescue. | | | |
| The clown on 11:40 - Nov 27 with 957 views | Sadoldgit |
| The clown on 10:24 - Nov 27 by Bazza |
I would prefer to go to a country that will house you initially in a hotel, pay you benefits, offer free health and education. Certainly a better option than live in a French tent. But would I risk my kids drowning? - no chance.
Awful that the border force boats stay in the harbour when the RNLI volunteers go to the rescue. |
I doubt if any us us would, but then we are bringing up families in war torn countries where murder and rape are everyday occurancies where we live.
The main point here is that refugees are a massive issue for many countries across the world (Turkey has much bigger issues than we do for example) and you can’t blame people for taking risks in trying to build a better life. We have an issue with the Channel crossings which both Johnson and Macron are making a pigs ear of when the matter really needs to be dealt with by grown ups. However we are not responsible for Macron, but we are responsible for Johnson and his cabinet members who, yet again, display a level of incompetence that would see us mere mortals sacked from our jobs. We need to sort things out and quickly. We could start by making the seeking of asylum in this country less problematic, perhaps by allowing people to apply at our embassies around the world rather than having to apply here. We have over 80,000 claimants here waiting for their applications to be processed. The system does not work. Change the system and hopefully that will stop people risking their lives crossing the Channel. | | | |
| The clown on 12:36 - Nov 27 with 926 views | 1885_SFC |
| The clown on 22:46 - Nov 26 by saint68 |
The simple,answer is to do as Australia have done..if you enter illegally you will be issued a life time ban and be refused any refugee status..simple yet effective. [Post edited 26 Nov 2021 22:50]
|
The Aussies always have the right ideas & the correct attitude on such matters. Being an island nation too, we could learn a lot from them.
I've watched that Aussie customs programme. They nab a lot of illegal immigrants sneaking into Australian waters on 'fake' fishing boats. The Aussies answer is to stick them all on a plane & send them back within 24-hours at the most - no questions asked. Always within 24-hours.
Meanwhile Britain is... well, Britain. Toothless, gutless & soft as shÃt. |  |
| |
| The clown on 14:08 - Nov 27 with 879 views | saint68 |
| The clown on 12:36 - Nov 27 by 1885_SFC |
The Aussies always have the right ideas & the correct attitude on such matters. Being an island nation too, we could learn a lot from them.
I've watched that Aussie customs programme. They nab a lot of illegal immigrants sneaking into Australian waters on 'fake' fishing boats. The Aussies answer is to stick them all on a plane & send them back within 24-hours at the most - no questions asked. Always within 24-hours.
Meanwhile Britain is... well, Britain. Toothless, gutless & soft as shÃt. |
Spot on 1885, we have far too many do-gooders that have rendered our legal system incapable of handing out real effective change..as soon as you arrive you're back on a flight no ifs no buts.
One of Australia's finer points indeed. | |
| |
| The clown on 17:42 - Nov 28 with 792 views | Bicester_North |
| The clown on 09:29 - Nov 27 by Sadoldgit |
What on Earth are you talking about? What has learning a language got to do with anything? Migration is a massive problem around the world. We are not alone in dealing with migration but all you can do is pick up on language? Instead of taking your lead from Priti Patel I suggest you listen to those people who deal directly with displaced families.
This from a survey taken from the “jungle” camp at Calais -
12% planned to stay in France
82% planned to go to the UK
52% planned to go to the UK because they have family here.
[Post edited 27 Nov 2021 10:27]
|
You mentioned having England as a second language was a reason to come here from mainland Europe and risk death. I questioned whether that’s worth killing the kids in a deadly crossing. Sort your senility out you tiresome bore. | |
| |
| The clown on 17:57 - Nov 28 with 776 views | Sadoldgit |
| The clown on 17:42 - Nov 28 by Bicester_North |
You mentioned having England as a second language was a reason to come here from mainland Europe and risk death. I questioned whether that’s worth killing the kids in a deadly crossing. Sort your senility out you tiresome bore. |
A reason, not the reason. There were plenty of others that you chose to ignore. I am being civil to you. Perhaps you should try to be civil back. | | | |
| The clown on 17:58 - Nov 28 with 773 views | saint68 |
| The clown on 17:42 - Nov 28 by Bicester_North |
You mentioned having England as a second language was a reason to come here from mainland Europe and risk death. I questioned whether that’s worth killing the kids in a deadly crossing. Sort your senility out you tiresome bore. |
Typical Arthurfuksakery..I'd suggest mate | |
| |
| The clown on 11:16 - Nov 30 with 639 views | DorsetIan |
I think she'll be gone soon. I've got the bunting on order already. | |
| |
| The clown on 13:27 - Nov 30 with 616 views | ExBaselSaint |
The mere fact that you watch C4 News kinda says it all | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
