Search results

Just realised?

You did suggest they should make false declarations in order to arrive in UK. That would be sufficient reason for refusal of asylum.

Pete probably didn't realise his avatar was of an air-sea-rescue service vehicle.

Only in leading or support roles.

And false information provided many times by the usual suspects.

So their claim for asylum would be approved before travelling to UK. But UK would not accept the application, if they had already applied elsewhere. They would need to wait for the decision elsewhere. You can't make multiple applications for asylum in multiple countries, then choose which one to...

They had some sort of recognised visa. For study, they will need a letter of acceptance from a school or university. For work, they will need a letter offering them emplyoment. For any other reason , they will still need some form of proof for their application for a visa to succede. They can't...

Motorbiking is being silly. You would need to apply for a visa "to claim asylum", but no such visa reason exists. If you apply for another type of visa, then claim asylum when you reach UK, you will be considered to have supplied false information on your visa application. Your application will...

You must be fully aware that a) Uk will not grant a visa "to claim asylum". It's not an acceptable reason for a visa, and b) UK will refuse you asylum on the basis that you have already claimed asylum elsewhere, if you were lucky enough to reach UK.

You're entitled to say whatever you want, it doesn't make it so. You're not entitled to spout false information to support your argument, irrespective of what that argument is.

Those immigrants who migrated years ago and have worked for many years in UK, and paying NI contributions are entitled to the state pension, depending on the number of years of their NI contributions. They're not on a visa, they will either have leave for indefinite stay, or will be UK citizens...

Like Afghanistan, Lebanon, Iranian, Palestinian, Syrian, victims, etc. as collateral damage, irrelevant?

There's no obligation on you to read anything. You're free to ignore my comments if you wish, I won't be offended in the least.

Imagine you're with your family, including some young children, you're strolling through the park, and you encounter a group of foreigners, black, brown, or any other coloured skin. Do you encourage your children to interact with them, and greet them as friends who you're pleased to meet...

I'm glad you asked, and I'm happy to explain it to you: And your approach to intersex illustrates your ideology is based on religious belief: Despite your religiously based beliefs, intersex babies are born, you can't simply deny their existence.

If someone has been born somewhere between male and female, and later in life they feel they were allocated the wrong sex, they may, or may not, feel the need to change their allocated sex, and adopt their preferred gender, i.e. become transexual. Why don't you show us, within some degree of...

That is simply you repeating of your claim, not what morqthana asked.

Legal definitions do not replace scientific facts. There have been many cases throughout history when legislation and science was in contradiction. Also many legal definitions were and are based on Christian beliefs.

She could join a Catholic or Christian community, which allows peadophiles to practice their sexul preferences and they just need to say sorry after each transgression, and supposedly all is well with the world. That kind of civilised comunity?

Extensive video footage of violence does not determine criminal actions, per se.