The laws an ass !

[AngleEyes]

No we haven't solved the problem.

But you can't use the argument that its not the neighbouring countries fault to justify why we should take asylum seekers who've travelled through a multitude of safe countries to get to ours because its not our fault either.

But UK should be prepared to shoulder an equal part of the burden created by wars, facilitates by UK arms manufacturers, and UK government's willingness to sell those arms.

 

[AngleEyes]

Their religion does matter. It matters when they convert to another religion purely to assist with their asylum application, ie suggesting that the fact they have converted to Christianity would make them liable to persecution in their country of origin.

Their religion only matters that they were persecuted in their country of origin. It makes no difference to their asylum application.
It is up to the asylum assessment to assess whether their reason for leaving was genuine or not. It is not for social media warriors to pass judgement on such matters.
Suppose someone escaped due to their sexuality or gender. Are they expected to prove the reason for their escaping?
How does one prove that they have converted to Christianity?

You are desperately looking for excuses for your anti-refugee attitude.

 

[AngleEyes]

this was a policy thought out by Priti Patel and the Border Force ages a while ago

Priti Patel should pay for the costs of the wasted courts time and the false imprisonment of refugees.

 

[fillyboy]

It is not for social media warriors to pass judgement on such matters.

Stop doing it then.

 

[AngleEyes]

Stop doing it then.

Please find an example of me trying to pass judgement on any one asylum case, let alone a host of them.
I consistently argue that the process should be left alone to make their own judgment not influenced by political ideology.

 

[motorbiking]

Here's one - see how hard that wasn't

Priti Patel should pay for the costs of the wasted courts time and the false imprisonment of refugees.

 

[AngleEyes]

Please find an example of me trying to pass judgement on any one asylum case, let alone a host of them.

Here's one - see how hard that wasn't

Priti Patel should pay for the costs of the wasted courts time and the false imprisonment of refugees.

How can that comment possibly be interpreted as passing a judgment on any individual asylum case?
Please explain your logic.

 

[motorbiking]

Would it surprise you to know that at least one of the people in the case had been done twice for piloting a vessel with the intention of illegally entering the UK? I'd urge you to read the transcript of the original case. He's a better skipper than me if he can pilot a dingy across the channel several times while only holding the outboard for a few seconds.

https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Crim/2021/503.html

 

[AngleEyes]

Would it surprise you to know that at least one of the people in the case had been done twice for piloting a vessel with the intention of illegally entering the UK? I'd urge you to read the transcript of the original case. He's a better skipper than me if he can pilot a dingy across the channel several times while only holding the outboard for a few seconds.

https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Crim/2021/503.html

Oh here we go, "go find the evidence to disprove something which you have never proven in the first place".
It is precisely that sort of behaviour that I criticised Justin Passing for. You make a claim that you've found some evidence to support your incredible claims, and you challenge your protagonist to disprove your theories. Are you incapable of copying and pasting the relevant bits of proof that you claimed to have found?

 

[AngleEyes]

the intention of illegally entering the UK?

The intention of entering the UK in order to claim asylum is not illegal.
The judgement was crystal clear on that point.
When you've found evidence to prove that it is illegal, I'll happily apologise.

Additionally, it is not illegal to make repeated attempts to arrive in UK in order to claim asylum.

And when you can get some treatment for your acute denial syndrome, let woody know where he can seek similar treatment.

 

[transam]

Would it surprise you to know that at least one of the people in the case had been done twice for piloting a vessel with the intention of illegally entering the UK? I'd urge you to read the transcript of the original case. He's a better skipper than me if he can pilot a dingy across the channel several times while only holding the outboard for a few seconds.

https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Crim/2021/503.html

exactly as said the law is an ass

 

[AngleEyes]

exactly as said the law is an ass

Is that according to pandas.

 

[motorbiking]

The intention of entering the UK in order to claim asylum is not illegal.
The judgement was crystal clear on that point.
When you've found evidence to prove that it is illegal, I'll happily apologise.

Additionally, it is not illegal to make repeated attempts to arrive in UK in order to claim asylum.

And when you can get some treatment for your acute denial syndrome, let woody know where he can seek similar treatment.

Why would someone need to do it 2 or 3 times? Evidence is in the transcript

These counts alleged that he had piloted a boat across the channel containing illegal migrants on two occasions, 24 July 2019 and 29 December 2019. Count 2 alleged that he had also committed a similar offence on the 12 December 2019. This was ordered to lie on the file in the usual terms.

 

[fillyboy]

Why would someone need to do it 3 times? Evidence is in the transcript

Maybe he kept getting repeatedly homesick for France.

 

[fillyboy]

Why would someone need to do it 3 times? Evidence is in the transcript

And after being refused asylum in Denmark?