• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Politics, politics, politics (so long and thanks for all the fish)

Silly McSilly Face said:
It is illegal to enter the UK if you are a non-UK national and do not have leave to enter. There is no defence to the offence that relates to claiming asylum. FYI it is simply a matter of practicality that the majority of people arriving illegally are not prosecuted for the offence. The courts would have capacity for less than 1% of arrivals and therefore guidance to law enforcement is that prosecution should be reserved for those attempting re-entry after deportation only.
Click to expand...

Take a moment and read the Geneva convention and you may grasp what laws we have signed up to.
 
One thing I have noticed when driving north from the north downs where I live l, the sky above London is much clearer than in the past.

Sometimes there is even some natural colour in it.
 
LutonSpurs said:
Take a moment and read the Geneva convention and you may grasp what laws we have signed up to.
Click to expand...
The Geneva convention does not interact with, including override, our municipal criminal law. You have committed a criminal offence by entering this country without leave Thats why they are referred to as illegal immigrants. As that is what they are. The Geneva convention states that a genuine refugee should not be punished for irregular entry into the state in question. And as I've stated guidance issued to law enforcement is that prosecution for irregular entry to the UK should be reserved for those attempting re-entry following a deportation order enforcement. Thata more to do with resource but we comply with the convention. Saying that, many coming here on boats are undocumented. So there is very little means to verify who they are or where they have come from and so the Geneva convention does not just automatically apply to anyone that rocks up in a dinghy claiming to be fleeing war and persecution (they all say that because its what theyve been told to say by the smugglers and online communities). Particularly 20-30 year old unaccompanied men that have supposedly left their entire families behind in the country of origin. They're here illegally until they're not (i.e. granted leave to remain)
 
Last edited:
SpurMeUp said:
Having watched one YT video


...I think we must be buying him to play midfield. Good long range passing. Can chip in with a goal, and good combative tackling. He seems a perfect midfielder. Not so much a #10.

What I liked about him is the speed he does things. As soon as he gets the ball he's racing to act quickly. No pondering, no pause to assess. He's looking to move forward right away. No doubt that is part of Nunos acounter attacking style. But not everyone can do that. The likes of Hogjberg only worked with time on the ball. As soon as he tried to play quick he'd lose the ball. Watching White when he gets the ball its like you're watch on double speed.
Click to expand...

Silly McSilly Face said:
The Geneva convention does not interact with, including override, our municipal criminal law. You have committed a criminal offence by entering this country without leave Thats why they are referred to as illegal immigrants. As that is what they are. The Geneva convention states that a genuine refugee should not be punished for irregular entry into the state in question. And as I've stated guidance issued to law enforcement is that prosecution for irregular entry to the UK should be reserved for those attempting re-entry following a deportation order enforcement. Thata more to do with resource but we comply with the convention. Saying that, many coming here on boats are undocumented. So there is very little means to verify who they are or where they have come from and so the Geneva convention does not just automatically apply to anyone that rocks up in a dinghy claiming to be fleeing war and persecution (they all say that because its what theyve been told to say by the smugglers and online communities). Particularly 20-30 year old unaccompanied men that have supposedly left their entire families behind in the country of origin. They're here illegally until they're not (i.e. granted leave to remain)
Click to expand...

I'm not reading all of that. While they are waiting for their claims to be processed they are not illegal immigrants. That's a fact. You were stating the opposite which is wrong.
 
LutonSpurs said:
I'm not reading all of that. While they are waiting for their claims to be processed they are not illegal immigrants. That's a fact. You were stating the opposite which is wrong.
Click to expand...
"I'm not reading your post but you stated something that is wrong and i'm right and that's a fact" ok. Conversation over then.

I didn't actually state the opposite of what you stated in your post. Nor am I wrong.
 
LutonSpurs said:
OK. Explain how asylum seekers waiting for their claim to be processed are illegal immigrants?
Click to expand...
I said they commit a criminal offence when they enter the UK without leave. Unless they've managed some manipulation of space time to be able to find an immigration lawyer, initiate the claim and be issued with the recognition documents that grant temporary leave to remain prior to landing on UK soil, then they arrive as illegal immigrants. Because that is what they are. Criminals funding criminals funding gun crime, drugs and human trafficking.
 
Silly McSilly Face said:
I said they commit a criminal offence when they enter the UK without leave. Unless they've managed some manipulation of space time to be able to find an immigration lawyer, initiate the claim and be issued with the recognition documents that grant temporary leave to remain prior to landing on UK soil, then they arrive as illegal immigrants. Because that is what they are. Criminals funding criminals funding gun crime, drugs and human trafficking.
Click to expand...

No. The moment they get here and they claim asylum and they are not illegal. They are legally not considered illegal immigrants. They are protected from prosecution due to international law. Unlike you are claiming.
 
LutonSpurs said:
No. The moment they get here and they claim asylum and they are not illegal. They are legally not considered illegal immigrants. They are protected from prosecution due to international law. Unlike you are claiming.
Click to expand...
The moment they get here having not gone through border control they've committed a criminal offence. They are very much considered illegal immigrants in the eyes of the law, hence why everyone refers to them as such. The Geneva Convention does not define a "refugee" as "someone that puts in a claim for asylum". The UK is able to assess whether those claiming asylum have a legitimate claim to refugee status under the convention. If their claims go through triage and appear to have potential merit they will be given refugee identity docs that allow right to remain while their claim is assessed and at this point they are no longer considered an "illegal immigrant" in the eyes of the law. The UK states that asylum claims may not be considered in the following circumstances:
- the person is an EU citizen
- the person travelled through a safe third country to arrive in the UK
- the person has a connection to a safe third country where they could claim asylum.

That guidance (particularly point 2) essentially places pretty much every douchebag arriving on inflatable boats from France in the "illegal until proven otherwise" category...
 
Silly McSilly Face said:
The moment they get here having not gone through border control they've committed a criminal offence. They are very much considered illegal immigrants in the eyes of the law, hence why everyone refers to them as such. The Geneva Convention does not define a "refugee" as "someone that puts in a claim for asylum". The UK is able to assess whether those claiming asylum have a legitimate claim to refugee status under the convention. If their claims go through triage and appear to have potential merit they will be given refugee identity docs that allow right to remain while their claim is assessed and at this point they are no longer considered an "illegal immigrant" in the eyes of the law. The UK states that asylum claims may not be considered in the following circumstances:
- the person is an EU citizen
- the person travelled through a safe third country to arrive in the UK
- the person has a connection to a safe third country where they could claim asylum.

That guidance (particularly point 2) essentially places pretty much every douchebag arriving on inflatable boats from France in the "illegal until proven otherwise" category...
Click to expand...
The Convention on Refugees - to which we are a signatory and which forms part of international law we have agreed to uphold -explicitly states that a person travelling to claim asylum does not have to do so in the first safe country through which he/she passes.

Quite why you would want to refer to these people as “douchebags” I don’t know but it’s hugely disrespectful and unnecessary.
 
Glenda's Legs said:
The Convention on Refugees - to which we are a signatory and which forms part of international law we have agreed to uphold -explicitly states that a person travelling to claim asylum does not have to do so in the first safe country through which he/she passes.

Quite why you would want to refer to these people as “douchebags” I don’t know but it’s hugely disrespectful and unnecessary.
Click to expand...
It does not explicitly state that we have to treat them as asylum seekers or refugees either or prohibit us from taking a dim view of travelling through multiple safe countries. It merely holds that it is not an automatic relinquishing of refugee status. Our stance of travelling via safe third countries negatively impacting the liklihood of asylum claims being considered is not incompatible with the treaty. And the UK's criminal law is what determines whether something is illegal in this country, not an international treaty. A refugee under the comvention is someone facing persecution in their home country based on their race, religion, nationality, political opinion or other characteristic likely to put them at risk. So as ive said, stepping off a boat and saying "i'm claiming asylum give me a lawyer" does not automatically just dissappear black and white uk law into a puff of smoke.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back