illegal fugee makes a mint

[Slogger]

seen the news

1 illegal fugee has been caught the police say he could have fraudulenty made claims to the tune of 1 million quid


this is the tip of the iceberg and in my mind this is enouight for me to say close the F****** door on the lot of them and repatriate the rest back to where they came from regardless of what they face

who the **** cares i know i dont and i know most of the uk couldnt give a **** either we are too soft on these c**ts

make me f******* sick and any dogooder wanting to dogood f*** off with them we need to get medevial on this lot teach them a good hard lesson


wake up you fools wake the **** up

 

[andy]

seen the news

1 illegal fugee has been caught the police say he could have fraudulenty made claims to the tune of 1 million quid


this is the tip of the iceberg and in my mind this is enouight for me to say close the F****** door on the lot of them and repatriate the rest back to where they came from regardless of what they face

who the **** cares i know i dont and i know most of the uk couldnt give a **** either we are too soft on these c**ts

make me f******* sick and any dogooder wanting to dogood f*** off with them we need to get medevial on this lot teach them a good hard lesson


wake up you fools wake the **** up

agree with you there. altho aslong as bliar is in charge, expect the worse, and your tax to go up to pay for them

 

[joe-90]

The problem is that they come into the country with no paperwork and make a claim.

The next day they come back with a different name and make a claim - and so it goes on.

They can have as many claims as they want to.

The solution is that they must give as DNA sample with their first claim that could then be cross referenced with every other claim ever made.

It would stop it over night.



joe

 

[oilman]

The problem is that they come into the country with no paperwork and make a claim.

The next day they come back with a different name and make a claim - and so it goes on.

They can have as many claims as they want to.

The solution is that they must give as DNA sample with their first claim that could then be cross referenced with every other claim ever made.

It would stop it over night.



joe

They don't need to be from another country to do this sort of thing. Do you have evidence to support your statements of "fact"?

 

[Softus]

The problem is that they come into the country with no paperwork and make a claim.

The next day they come back with a different name and make a claim - and so it goes on.

They can have as many claims as they want to.

The solution is that they must give as DNA sample with their first claim that could then be cross referenced with every other claim ever made.

It would stop it over night.



joe

I don't think you know very much about DNA profiling. It isn't a means of detecting a single person - it merely provides a statistical probability of two DNA profiles being taken from the same person.

Hence your suggestion, whilst kinda nice, isn't practical, because there would have to be other evidence, or justifiable suspicion, that the person was the same as a previous claimant, in order to for a tissue sample to be taken and submitted for profiling.

 

[Softus]

They don't need to be from another country to do this sort of thing. Do you have evidence to support your statements of "fact"?

Oh yes - oilman's posting has reminded me of something I neglected to point out joe, which is that your posting was a blinkered and xenophobic rant that leaches more poison than a suppurating rat's arse.

 

[AdamW]

I think you are being hard on Joe there: if you are a total unknown in this country (i.e. an illegal immigrant/asylum seeker) then it really isn't a big leap to go from claiming the dole to forming several identities and taking a lot more.

Due to differences in naming conventions around the world, it is quite common for those originating in certain areas to have several pseudonyms. Imagine your name is John Smith. That is your name, that is the only way you call it. It might be John Dave Smith, but that's as far as it goes. But in the traditions of arabic countries you might call yourself John al Dave (if your dad is called Dave), John al Dave al Bernard (if your grandad is called Bernard), John al Dave al Bernard al Tony and so forth.

There is nothing xenophobic about keeping proper controls over those who are guests to the UK. If they are seeking asylum, I'm pretty sure that a cheek swab is far more preferable to whatever fate they were assured in the country they are fleeing from.

Now, I don't know how accurate DNA signature tests are, but I suspect that when combined with other biometric information you can have a test that would even determine differences between identical twins.

 

[joe-90]

They don't need to be from another country to do this sort of thing. Do you have evidence to support your statements of "fact"?

For crying out loud - that's how it's done. Read a little in the real papers my friend - not the Sun and that sort of bilge. That's what the 21/7 bombers were up to.

If you or I make a claim we have to prove who we are - an asylum seeker doesn't have to prove a thing.

Gedditt yet?




joe

 

[joe-90]

The problem is that they come into the country with no paperwork and make a claim.

The next day they come back with a different name and make a claim - and so it goes on.

They can have as many claims as they want to.

The solution is that they must give as DNA sample with their first claim that could then be cross referenced with every other claim ever made.

It would stop it over night.



joe

I don't think you know very much about DNA profiling. It isn't a means of detecting a single person - it merely provides a statistical probability of two DNA profiles being taken from the same person.

Hence your suggestion, whilst kinda nice, isn't practical, because there would have to be other evidence, or justifiable suspicion, that the person was the same as a previous claimant, in order to for a tissue sample to be taken and submitted for profiling.

Don't be silly mate. The chance of two people having the same DNA profile is billions to one.

You simply enter the samples from claiments and cross reference. If you get two or more matches you arrange an interview with all the matching parties at the same time. You only need a swab. If you are so 'PC' then take fingerprints and cross reference them.

It's pretty basic stuff isn't it?


joe

 

[joe-90]

They don't need to be from another country to do this sort of thing. Do you have evidence to support your statements of "fact"?

Oh yes - oilman's posting has reminded me of something I neglected to point out joe, which is that your posting was a blinkered and xenophobic rant that leaches more poison than a suppurating rat's a**e.

What are you blathering about, man?

Take a look at the first post in this thread and compare it with my solution to fraud. Go on do it. Show where my post is anything but a method of preventing fraud.
Come on SHOW ME. (He won't ).



joe

 

[Softus]

I think you are being hard on Joe there: if you are a total unknown in this country (i.e. an illegal immigrant/asylum seeker) then it really isn't a big leap to go from claiming the dole to forming several identities and taking a lot more.

Indeed? Well it's possible, and might even be easy, for an immigrant to behave as you've outlined. However, we have this:

The problem is that they come into the country... The solution is that they must give as DNA sample...

Intuitively, and perhaps wrongly, I expect that the amount of domestic benefit fraud far outstrips that claimed by the criminal subset of immigrants. Certainly there is room for doubt, therefore it would be nice to see some hard statistics to back up joe-90's claim. It is this evidence that is sorely lacking, and my rebuke, if indeed it was one, is aimed at the fact that he persistently fails to provide it. Or even to appear as though he's considered it's importance.

Now, I don't know how accurate DNA signature tests are, but I suspect that when combined with other biometric information you can have a test that would even determine differences between identical twins.

Um, not really. A DNA profile consists of a set of sampled points in the entire chain; these are very few relative to the maximum set, but those chosen correspond to genetically inherited characteristics. When two profiles are compared, which itself is a skilled task, the result is a probability that the two profiles came from samples taken from the same person. There is no such thing as certainty in this measurement and assessment, and there is significant scope for error and doubt in circumstances such as identical twins.

It is this probability that is used in court evidence, but only when combined with other evidence - the popular view, although now a decaying one, that DNA evidence delivers scientific certainty of identity, is, and always was, a fallacy.

You might want to read more here, as a starting point. It's all interesting stuff.

 

[Softus]

Come on SHOW ME. (He won't ).

I'm not really sure if you're addressing me or oilman. Notwithstanding that, in order to show you I'd need to have faith that you can read and digest some pretty basic information - sadly, the evidence is to the contrary.

For example, you could just read my earlier posting about DNA profiling, rather than ask me to effectively post that information again. Instead, yet again, you're doing a grand impression of a complete and utter ignoramus.

 

[AdamW]

Now, I don't know how accurate DNA signature tests are, but I suspect that when combined with other biometric information you can have a test that would even determine differences between identical twins.

Um, not really. A DNA profile consists of a set of sampled points in the entire chain;

 

[joe-90]

Come on SHOW ME. (He won't ).

I'm not really sure if you're addressing me or oilman. Notwithstanding that, in order to show you I'd need to have faith that you can read and digest some pretty basic information - sadly, the evidence is to the contrary.

For example, you could just read my earlier posting about DNA profiling, rather than ask me to effectively post that information again. Instead, yet again, you're doing a grand impression of a complete and utter ignoramus.

It's no good blustering mate. You are saying that DNA profiling is not accurate? Better tell that to the courts and the police eh?

Just quit the abuse and stick to the topic.

What I'm saying to you is that if immigrants were DNA profiled on arrival then their profile could be databased (the UK already has 2 million on its database). Then every new claim and every new profile could be cross-referenced. If there appeard to be a close match or a posotive match then an inteview could be arranged to see both parties at the same time.

Now you tell me what is wrong with that?

Or if you like you could take fingerprints or iris photographs.

Take your pick, mate - they'll all work.


joe

 

[Softus]

...it merely provides a statistical probability of two DNA profiles being taken from the same person.

Don't be silly mate. The chance of two people having the same DNA profile is billions to one.

Er, how have you calculated that? Are you using a different definition of the term "DNA profile" to that used by the FSS (Forensic Science Service)?

You simply enter the samples from claiments and cross reference. If you get two or more matches you arrange an interview with all the matching parties at the same time. You only need a swab. If you are so 'PC' then take fingerprints and cross reference them.

It's pretty basic stuff isn't it?

You certainly make it sound basic, no doubt using the same skills that you use to make yourself appear to be an imbecile, however, in the real world (that you visit only occasionally), it is quite a complex issue, which is why it gets discussed in the HoC and why there are many cases of appeal against wrongful prosecution. The fact that you believe the issue to be basic underlines your comprehensive misunderstanding of the principles involved.

Oh; and one more thing - I'm not your "mate".