- Joined
- 25 Jul 2022
- Messages
- 18,054
- Reaction score
- 1,513
- Country
Great. But what does international law say ?
Are we right to just ignore international law ? We are sliding down the table of respectability
Channel migrants face lifetime ban on returning to UK
- Thread starter motorbiking
- Start date
Are we right to just ignore international law ? We are sliding down the table of respectability
It would greatly enhance the UK's respectability if we disregarded rules that are clearly not fit for purpose and are being massively abused on an organised scale. I'm sure that others would join us if we did, following our very logical lead.
Just yesterday I listened to a lovely well-meaning vicar from some local church on the radio. They're housing Iranians while awaiting their applications. They were persecuted because they're Christian. "Awww", you're meant to think. Then it was mentioned at the end that they had "converted" to Christianity, no doubt in order to make themselves qualify. They didn't say when, my bet is that it was five minutes before arriving here. There's no "conversion" process at all in reality, you don't even need a bible, you just say you're a Christian. Potentially the entire population of Iran or any of the many other nutjob fundamentalist states could move here based on this argument. I don't blame the individual people one bit, they're doing what's best for themselves, and if I was Iranian I'd probably prefer to live pretty much anywhere else. But the system is an utter joke, we're a rich country but definitely won't be for much longer if we just allow the world to walk in and give them a home, expenses and pocket money.
I suspect that many socialists don't actually recognise that they themselves are "the rich" that need to have their money taken from them and handed out more fairly. In a fair world you end up with one room per family, not a house. And forget having a car or any other luxuries.
Last edited:
If they were persecuted for being Christians then it would've taken place in the country of origin, yes?
So, longer than five minutes - or even five days. Five weeks, maybe?
All speculation, in other words.
- Joined
- 22 Jan 2007
- Messages
- 22,909
- Reaction score
- 3,073
- Country
There are Christians in other parts of the world, but you have just decided that these ones are not, but are instead pulling the wool over our eyes. It's another gut feeling which says more about you than them.
You're assuming that we require any evidence of such persecution or even that such a thing is possible.
"Hello, is that the Iranian government? Can you please confirm the degree of violence that you used against this person named ..."
I don't know what the application procedure consists of, but presumably if those with genuine need are allowed in without hard evidence then it must be pretty trivial for anyone else to tick whatever box is required.
You can bet that there's lots of unofficial knowledge and training within Iran and elsewhere, telling people what to say to qualify. They probably get a leaflet from the people smugglers.
Care to contribute some intelligent debate and actually post something informative instead of the usual silly insults?
What's your point exactly, other than proving that you're a bit unhinged?
- Joined
- 22 Jan 2007
- Messages
- 22,909
- Reaction score
- 3,073
- Country
You said it yourself.
You don't know how the application process works but you have already decided they are lying and will not be found out. How do you know they are not what they claim to be?
How do you know what you don't know about what I do or don't know?
This is how you rack up over 8000 posts of approximately nothing.
This is how you rack up over 8000 posts of approximately nothing.
- Joined
- 22 Jan 2007
- Messages
- 22,909
- Reaction score
- 3,073
- Country
Why do you ask for proper debate then behave like a child?
I don't know if they are genuine or not. I would hope the process will come to the correct conclusion. I simply asked asked how you already know they are playing the system.
But if you were in mortal danger in the island nation of the UK, and there were no legal options available to apply for refugee status...
How would you get to France?
It's extremely likely. If they personally are not then it seems obvious that having such a system openly encourages people to do whatever is required to tick the box.
Basically a lifetime of comfortable living is available if you give the required answer to a question, at no cost to you.
I know socialists are generally blind to obvious uinintended consequences, but here is one dangling right in front of everyone with a big sign on it. Yet some still think they must all be in genuine need, despite the vast majority being young adult males (i.e. starting out lin life, seeking their fortune).
Basically a lifetime of comfortable living is available if you give the required answer to a question, at no cost to you.
I know socialists are generally blind to obvious uinintended consequences, but here is one dangling right in front of everyone with a big sign on it. Yet some still think they must all be in genuine need, despite the vast majority being young adult males (i.e. starting out lin life, seeking their fortune).
Nobody's suggesting that other than you. The issue is that they came here from France, which nulls their asylum claim from the start.
If the incentive to come here was removed then they wouldn't arrive in the first place.
What mottie/motman is saying is that he would go to the first safe country, and he mentioned France...
But France would have the same policy as the UK, namely...
To claim asylum in the UK, a person must be in the UK. It is not possible to apply from outside the UK, and there are no 'asylum visas'.
Reciprocal measures would be taken...
So mottie/motman would be screwed unless he found an 'illegal' way of getting to France and then applying...
I wonder by what method that could be?
And what you are actually suggesting is that the UK abandons international law and takes in no asylum seekers!
I'd have to try an illegal option and suffer the consequences if I got caught whether it be sent back to where I came from or shipped off to some African country. I doubt I'd have a hotel room waiting for me and an army of Lefty lawyers waiting to fight my case for free in France. Anyway, It's no good asking me hypothetical questions. Ask those that have ACTUALLY travelled through several SAFE countries and still risk their lives crossing the busiest stretch of water in a rubber dingy what persecution they were fleeing from in Italy and France.
I don't know how these lefty lawyers can stand up in court and say 'My persecuted client feared for their life and fled danger from XXXXX country. They reached Italy, a safe country. They then left Italy and entered France. Another safe country. I demand the right for them to be able to leave that safe country and enter yet ANOTHER safe country'. You couldn't make it up, could you?
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Deleted member 18243
- General Discussion
