Ssssssshhhhhh, don't mention Reform.

[Highway Man]

I'm glad you made the connection....

View attachment 382208

Billy bullshít birds of a feather.

Troll

 

[noseall]

Troll

Liar.

 

[Highway Man]

Liar.

Beats being a troll

 

[motorbiking]

if their passage is innocent, that is sufficient. Their intention is irrelevant.


The traffickers will not be in the boat.
Therefore the circumstances of how the refugees acquired the boat, or were given passage, or the condition of the boat, is irrelevant.
I have presented numerous times that the status or circumstances of those in distress is irrelevant.

you're confusing UNLCOS with SOLAS

 

[motorbiking]

Correct, unless France agrees...

"...Article 19 of UNCLOS says that if a "foreign ship" enters another country's territorial waters it will "be considered to be prejudicial to the peace" if "it engages in the loading or unloading of any... person contrary to the immigration laws" of that country.

BBC Verify spoke to two experts in maritime law.

James M. Turner KC, a shipping lawyer at Quadrant Chambers, told us: "The French would have to grant express permission for UK vessels to carry rescued people through their territorial waters and to leave them ashore in France".

Ainhoa Campàs Velasco, a maritime law expert from the University of Southampton, said migrants could not be returned to French shores, "unilaterally, and without prior agreement with France..."

An entirely different idea that is not being discussed here.

The above refers to "take backs". i.e. the idea that a UK vessel can ferry illegals back to France from UK territory and drop them off at a random French port. Nobody is proposing this is legal. It is of course entirely different to preventing them from entering UK territorial waters.

 

[motorbiking]

MBK has been making a whole load of different claims, this is just the latest

nope.

I stated that a coastal state has the power to refuse entry to its territorial waters - this is defined in Article 25 of UNCLOS. A valid reason is as per Article 19, clause 2, (g).

I have also stated that a vessel of any flag is compelled to rescue people on a vessel in distress and may take it back to France without needing any permission from the French. This is defined in Reg 33 of SOLAS.

we can:
- prevent them from entering UK waters
- Take them back to France if they are in distress.

If you want to look at the methods, I'm more than happy to show you how a boat hook or long pole wont be needed.

The basic issue that the illegals boat has is this:
- its is approx 30-70ft long, typically has a flat bottom and is propelled by a single outboard motor. It can barely hold a course and make 5kts.

Any intercept vessel will have a deep v-hull, have two engines and a top speed of around 60-70kts.

twin engine boats can go forward, sideways and backwards. Even a jetski would be able to nudge a migrant boat around.

 

[noseall]

Beats being a troll

I'll take your word for it. When did you switch?

 

[noseall]

It is of course entirely different to preventing them from entering UK territorial waters.

Preventing them - how? A coastal blockade? Even Fromage is not that stupid.

preventing them from entering UK territorial waters.

Not going to happen, no matter who is running the UK.

 

[Deleted member 323070]

nope.

I stated that a coastal state has the power to refuse entry to its territorial waters - this is defined in Article 25 of UNCLOS. A valid reason is as per Article 19, clause 2, (g).

Only if the vessel is shown to be "not Innocent"
here we go again, round and round the wrekin all over again..

I have also stated that a vessel of any flag is compelled to rescue people on a vessel in distress and may take it back to France without needing any permission from the French. This is defined in Reg 33 of SOLAS.

It may, but it would be courteous and facilitate the landing of those rescued, by informing and requesting permission. to land those rescued.

we can:
- prevent them from entering UK waters

We can't and I have explained many times why your version is incorrect.

- Take them back to France if they are in distress.

But as said, it would be courteous and effective to seek permission.

If you want to look at the methods, I'm more than happy to show you how a boat hook or long pole wont be needed.

The basic issue that the illegals boat has is this:
- its is approx 30-70ft long, typically has a flat bottom and is propelled by a single outboard motor. It can barely hold a course and make 5kts.

Any intercept vessel will have a deep v-hull, have two engines and a top speed of around 60-70kts.

twin engine boats can go forward, sideways and backwards. Even a jetski would be able to nudge a migrant boat around.

Any such action would endanger the lives of those onboard, not to mention the probable defensive actions by the refugees in defending any such attacks on their boat.

Wakey wakey, you seem to be dreaming.

 

[Deleted member 323070]

you're confusing UNLCOS with SOLAS

I'm not confusing anything. I kept the two sections separate for a reason.
I'll label them for you so you're not confused

UNCLOS
if their passage is innocent, that is sufficient. Their intention is irrelevant.

SOLAS
The traffickers will not be in the boat.
Therefore the circumstances of how the refugees acquired the boat, or were given passage, or the condition of the boat, is irrelevant.
I have presented numerous times that the status or circumstances of those in distress is irrelevant.

 

[motorbiking]

Only if the vessel is shown to be "not Innocent"
here we go again, round and round the wrekin all over again..

We are going around in circles because you want to ignore Article 19 2,(g) I can see why.

It may, but it would be courteous and facilitate the landing of those rescued, by informing and requesting permission. to land those rescued.

but not a requirement - we got there in the end

We can't and I have explained many times why your version is incorrect.

We can -you choosing to ignore the fact that until a person claims asylum he has no protection from his law breaking. Plenty are prosecuted.

But as said, it would be courteous and effective to seek permission.



Any such action would endanger the lives of those onboard, not to mention the probable defensive actions by the refugees in defending any such attacks on their boat.

No more than a wave, some wind, some prop wash. What are they going to do - throw their passports at them?

 

[Deleted member 323070]

We are going around in circles because you want to ignore Article 19 2,(g) I can see why.

Free passage for innocent vessels is assumed, until it is shown that the vessel is not innocent. What do you expect the refugees to do, attack the RNLI boats?

but not a requirement - we got there in the end

I never claimed it was.
Similarly, Notch and Noseall has repeatedly said that UK boats cannot land refugees in France with their agreement. That is true, unless they have been rescued. But even then, they wouldn't because the rescue will invariably in UK waters. Except for an odd occasion when bodies may be recovered.

We can -you choosing to ignore the fact that until a person claims asylum he has no protection from his law breaking.

The status of the people being rescued is irrelevant. Read SOLAS.
The circumstances in how they got into difficulty is irrelevant. Read SOLAS.

Plenty are prosecuted.

But not for entering UK to claim asylum.

No more than a wave, some wind, some prop wash. What are they going to do - throw their passports at them?

They have phones don't they, to record the criminal intent of those trying to sink them.

 

[motorbiking]

Free passage for innocent vessels is assumed, until it is shown that the vessel is not innocent. What do you expect the refugees to do, attack the RNLI boats?

nonsense

I never claimed it was.
Similarly, Notch and Noseall has repeatedly said that UK boats cannot land refugees in France with their agreement. That is true, unless they have been rescued. But even then, they wouldn't because the rescue will invariably in UK waters. Except for an odd occasion when bodies may be recovered.

except when they have been rescued

The status of the people being rescued is irrelevant. Read SOLAS.
The circumstances in how they got into difficulty is irrelevant. Read SOLAS.

back to France they go.

But not for entering UK to claim asylum.

If you don't claim you have no protection

They have phones don't they, to record the criminal intent of those trying to sink them.

nobody is trying to sink them. They are refused entry and turned around. Simple.

 

[Highway Man]

They have phones don't they, to record the criminal intent of those trying to sink them.

No, they use those to arrange their ilegal passage and to keep their mates up to date on how it goes.

 

[noseall]

They are refused entry and turned around.

How does that work? A blockade?