Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to Politics |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
seriously you have ti give it some time and I dont thin he will just jump in with both feet and try tp change things all at once that was her misstake.
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I say this as someone who very strongly believe the Tories need to be gone for a good while as they have fucked up the UK and totally most their way, forgotten their centre/right roots and swung too far right... I don’t want a general election right now. We need some stability and consistency for several months. Things need to calm down for a bit and they need to deal with the shit they have created and own it. In the meantime Labour (as let’s face it, in our current FPTP system they are the only alternative) needs to put together some watertight costed policies and promote them. Be clear on what they stand for. Stop acting like an opposition and actually start behaving like the Govt in waiting with credible policies that demonstrably benefit the majority in society. Personally I would like to see a GE middle next year." *grrrr typos | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"sks frist question are you going to call a general ellection Rishi NO
seriously you have ti give it some time and I dont thin he will just jump in with both feet and try tp change things all at once that was her misstake.
"Has 12 years not been enough time? A new self serving narcissist at the helm is going to make no difference. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"sks frist question are you going to call a general ellection Rishi NO
seriously you have ti give it some time and I dont thin he will just jump in with both feet and try tp change things all at once that was her misstake.
Has 12 years not been enough time?
A new self serving narcissist at the helm is going to make no difference. "Do you know that for sure ? Yes 12 years under different people and the first 5 years was a coalition with clegg and the LDP who incidentally opposed the nuclear power stations saying we would not see anything until 2022  well here we are and would have been nuclear by now or at least majority nuclear.
So I think we should at least see what gives because a general election would not be good right now.
I think Sunak will be more hands on than Boris but time will tell.
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"sks frist question are you going to call a general ellection Rishi NO
seriously you have ti give it some time and I dont thin he will just jump in with both feet and try tp change things all at once that was her misstake.
Has 12 years not been enough time?
A new self serving narcissist at the helm is going to make no difference.
Do you know that for sure ? Yes 12 years under different people and the first 5 years was a coalition with clegg and the LDP who incidentally opposed the nuclear power stations saying we would not see anything until 2022 well here we are and would have been nuclear by now or at least majority nuclear.
So I think we should at least see what gives because a general election would not be good right now.
I think Sunak will be more hands on than Boris but time will tell.
"Fair enough. I can't see there being any improvement in behaviour. But we'll see. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"sks frist question are you going to call a general ellection Rishi NO
seriously you have ti give it some time and I dont thin he will just jump in with both feet and try tp change things all at once that was her misstake.
Has 12 years not been enough time?
A new self serving narcissist at the helm is going to make no difference.
Do you know that for sure ? Yes 12 years under different people and the first 5 years was a coalition with clegg and the LDP who incidentally opposed the nuclear power stations saying we would not see anything until 2022 well here we are and would have been nuclear by now or at least majority nuclear.
So I think we should at least see what gives because a general election would not be good right now.
I think Sunak will be more hands on than Boris but time will tell.
Fair enough.
I can't see there being any improvement in behaviour. But we'll see."There's an immediate improvement, he looks and acts professionally compared to the last two morons. Yes he's made some contentious choices in his cabinet but you have to remember he can't govern on his own, he needs majority support and if that means keeping your friends close and your enemies even closer he didn't really have a choice. A united conservative party can serve us much better than a fragmented party at least until they can be voted out by the electorate. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"sks frist question are you going to call a general ellection Rishi NO
seriously you have ti give it some time and I dont thin he will just jump in with both feet and try tp change things all at once that was her misstake.
Has 12 years not been enough time?
A new self serving narcissist at the helm is going to make no difference.
Do you know that for sure ? Yes 12 years under different people and the first 5 years was a coalition with clegg and the LDP who incidentally opposed the nuclear power stations saying we would not see anything until 2022 well here we are and would have been nuclear by now or at least majority nuclear.
So I think we should at least see what gives because a general election would not be good right now.
I think Sunak will be more hands on than Boris but time will tell.
Fair enough.
I can't see there being any improvement in behaviour. But we'll see.
There's an immediate improvement, he looks and acts professionally compared to the last two morons.
Yes he's made some contentious choices in his cabinet but you have to remember he can't govern on his own, he needs majority support and if that means keeping your friends close and your enemies even closer he didn't really have a choice. A united conservative party can serve us much better than a fragmented party at least until they can be voted out by the electorate."I strongly disagree with the concept that the Conservative party have any interest in serving us. They serve their corporate backers, friends and themselves. I would agree that he could be better at serving them. But that's no use to the rest of the country. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"sks frist question are you going to call a general ellection Rishi NO
seriously you have ti give it some time and I dont thin he will just jump in with both feet and try tp change things all at once that was her misstake.
Has 12 years not been enough time?
A new self serving narcissist at the helm is going to make no difference.
Do you know that for sure ? Yes 12 years under different people and the first 5 years was a coalition with clegg and the LDP who incidentally opposed the nuclear power stations saying we would not see anything until 2022 well here we are and would have been nuclear by now or at least majority nuclear.
So I think we should at least see what gives because a general election would not be good right now.
I think Sunak will be more hands on than Boris but time will tell.
Fair enough.
I can't see there being any improvement in behaviour. But we'll see.
There's an immediate improvement, he looks and acts professionally compared to the last two morons.
Yes he's made some contentious choices in his cabinet but you have to remember he can't govern on his own, he needs majority support and if that means keeping your friends close and your enemies even closer he didn't really have a choice. A united conservative party can serve us much better than a fragmented party at least until they can be voted out by the electorate.
I strongly disagree with the concept that the Conservative party have any interest in serving us.
They serve their corporate backers, friends and themselves. I would agree that he could be better at serving them. But that's no use to the rest of the country. "You are if course welcome to your opinion and that's why we each have a vote. Some of us disregard the non mainstream media and will make our own appraisal based on what happens not what has happened. Maybe out views will change but blinkers won't solve anything. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"sks frist question are you going to call a general ellection Rishi NO
seriously you have ti give it some time and I dont thin he will just jump in with both feet and try tp change things all at once that was her misstake.
Has 12 years not been enough time?
A new self serving narcissist at the helm is going to make no difference.
Do you know that for sure ? Yes 12 years under different people and the first 5 years was a coalition with clegg and the LDP who incidentally opposed the nuclear power stations saying we would not see anything until 2022 well here we are and would have been nuclear by now or at least majority nuclear.
So I think we should at least see what gives because a general election would not be good right now.
I think Sunak will be more hands on than Boris but time will tell.
Fair enough.
I can't see there being any improvement in behaviour. But we'll see.
There's an immediate improvement, he looks and acts professionally compared to the last two morons.
Yes he's made some contentious choices in his cabinet but you have to remember he can't govern on his own, he needs majority support and if that means keeping your friends close and your enemies even closer he didn't really have a choice. A united conservative party can serve us much better than a fragmented party at least until they can be voted out by the electorate.
I strongly disagree with the concept that the Conservative party have any interest in serving us.
They serve their corporate backers, friends and themselves. I would agree that he could be better at serving them. But that's no use to the rest of the country.
You are if course welcome to your opinion and that's why we each have a vote. Some of us disregard the non mainstream media and will make our own appraisal based on what happens not what has happened. Maybe out views will change but blinkers won't solve anything."More Tory rule won't change anything. Is my opinion. And the majority of people vote as the media tells them to. IE, vote Conservative. Why else would they? Unless of course they donate to the party and win lucrative PPE contracts, and that sort of behaviour. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"sks frist question are you going to call a general ellection Rishi NO
seriously you have ti give it some time and I dont thin he will just jump in with both feet and try tp change things all at once that was her misstake.
Has 12 years not been enough time?
A new self serving narcissist at the helm is going to make no difference.
Do you know that for sure ? Yes 12 years under different people and the first 5 years was a coalition with clegg and the LDP who incidentally opposed the nuclear power stations saying we would not see anything until 2022 well here we are and would have been nuclear by now or at least majority nuclear.
So I think we should at least see what gives because a general election would not be good right now.
I think Sunak will be more hands on than Boris but time will tell.
Fair enough.
I can't see there being any improvement in behaviour. But we'll see.
There's an immediate improvement, he looks and acts professionally compared to the last two morons.
Yes he's made some contentious choices in his cabinet but you have to remember he can't govern on his own, he needs majority support and if that means keeping your friends close and your enemies even closer he didn't really have a choice. A united conservative party can serve us much better than a fragmented party at least until they can be voted out by the electorate."I agree, except that Braverman's appointment has already caused chaos and he will be using up a lot of political capital to keep her in post. A huge distraction from Day 1. It may also be masterful politics on his part to trash her and give her something to occupy her time with other than break the Home Office and dream her nasty dreams. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"People are only trashing Braverman because she has good policies and may actually have the drive to implement them despite the obstructive Civil Servants in the Home Office." Do you have an example of her "good policies"? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"People are only trashing Braverman because she has good policies and may actually have the drive to implement them despite the obstructive Civil Servants in the Home Office. Do you have an example of her "good policies"?" Brexit supporter, ECHR withdrawal, send migrants to Rwanda, reducing migration, for free speech, against the cancel culture which is infecting our society. Any more? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"People are only trashing Braverman because she has good policies and may actually have the drive to implement them despite the obstructive Civil Servants in the Home Office. Do you have an example of her "good policies"? Brexit supporter, ECHR withdrawal, send migrants to Rwanda, reducing migration, for free speech, against the cancel culture which is infecting our society. Any more?" Lol. I mean none of these can be considered "good" by any stretch of the imagination. Brexit: designed to fuck over ordinary people for the benefit of the ultra rich. Hardly a positive. ECHR withdrawal: removal of human rights. Generally considered not a good thing. Wasting hundreds of millions trafficking humans to Rwanda. Absolutely fucking horrific. Reducing migration, I assume you mean immigration? Hate based distraction politics. Again, not a good thing. Braverman is the queen of culture wars and cancel culture. She tried to cancel Twitter, Trans rights etc etc etc. If you have any more. I'm all ears. I think the point is. "People are trashing Braverman because she has good policies" is not accurate. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"People are only trashing Braverman because she has good policies and may actually have the drive to implement them despite the obstructive Civil Servants in the Home Office. Do you have an example of her "good policies"? Brexit supporter, ECHR withdrawal, send migrants to Rwanda, reducing migration, for free speech, against the cancel culture which is infecting our society. Any more? Lol. I mean none of these can be considered "good" by any stretch of the imagination. Brexit: designed to fuck over ordinary people for the benefit of the ultra rich. Hardly a positive. ECHR withdrawal: removal of human rights. Generally considered not a good thing. Wasting hundreds of millions trafficking humans to Rwanda. Absolutely fucking horrific. Reducing migration, I assume you mean immigration? Hate based distraction politics. Again, not a good thing. Braverman is the queen of culture wars and cancel culture. She tried to cancel Twitter, Trans rights etc etc etc. If you have any more. I'm all ears. I think the point is. "People are trashing Braverman because she has good policies" is not accurate. " It looks like we have different points of view on this. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"People are only trashing Braverman because she has good policies and may actually have the drive to implement them despite the obstructive Civil Servants in the Home Office. Do you have an example of her "good policies"? Brexit supporter, ECHR withdrawal, send migrants to Rwanda, reducing migration, for free speech, against the cancel culture which is infecting our society. Any more? Lol. I mean none of these can be considered "good" by any stretch of the imagination. Brexit: designed to fuck over ordinary people for the benefit of the ultra rich. Hardly a positive. ECHR withdrawal: removal of human rights. Generally considered not a good thing. Wasting hundreds of millions trafficking humans to Rwanda. Absolutely fucking horrific. Reducing migration, I assume you mean immigration? Hate based distraction politics. Again, not a good thing. Braverman is the queen of culture wars and cancel culture. She tried to cancel Twitter, Trans rights etc etc etc. If you have any more. I'm all ears. I think the point is. "People are trashing Braverman because she has good policies" is not accurate. It looks like we have different points of view on this." Definitely. Which is fine. But people have legitimate reasons for being unhappy with Braverman's appointment. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"People are only trashing Braverman because she has good policies and may actually have the drive to implement them despite the obstructive Civil Servants in the Home Office. Do you have an example of her "good policies"? Brexit supporter, ECHR withdrawal, send migrants to Rwanda, reducing migration, for free speech, against the cancel culture which is infecting our society. Any more?" The question was about good policies. Evidently she doesn't have any thag you can think of. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"People are only trashing Braverman because she has good policies and may actually have the drive to implement them despite the obstructive Civil Servants in the Home Office. Do you have an example of her "good policies"? Brexit supporter, ECHR withdrawal, send migrants to Rwanda, reducing migration, for free speech, against the cancel culture which is infecting our society. Any more? Lol. I mean none of these can be considered "good" by any stretch of the imagination. Brexit: designed to fuck over ordinary people for the benefit of the ultra rich. Hardly a positive. ECHR withdrawal: removal of human rights. Generally considered not a good thing. Wasting hundreds of millions trafficking humans to Rwanda. Absolutely fucking horrific. Reducing migration, I assume you mean immigration? Hate based distraction politics. Again, not a good thing. Braverman is the queen of culture wars and cancel culture. She tried to cancel Twitter, Trans rights etc etc etc. If you have any more. I'm all ears. I think the point is. "People are trashing Braverman because she has good policies" is not accurate. " That free speech one... Her policy is nothing of the sort. There's a bill currently going through that will mean you can be tagged for even suggesting a demonstration. That is a shocker, even for this government. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"People are only trashing Braverman because she has good policies and may actually have the drive to implement them despite the obstructive Civil Servants in the Home Office. Do you have an example of her "good policies"? Brexit supporter, ECHR withdrawal, send migrants to Rwanda, reducing migration, for free speech, against the cancel culture which is infecting our society. Any more? Lol. I mean none of these can be considered "good" by any stretch of the imagination. Brexit: designed to fuck over ordinary people for the benefit of the ultra rich. Hardly a positive. ECHR withdrawal: removal of human rights. Generally considered not a good thing. Wasting hundreds of millions trafficking humans to Rwanda. Absolutely fucking horrific. Reducing migration, I assume you mean immigration? Hate based distraction politics. Again, not a good thing. Braverman is the queen of culture wars and cancel culture. She tried to cancel Twitter, Trans rights etc etc etc. If you have any more. I'm all ears. I think the point is. "People are trashing Braverman because she has good policies" is not accurate. That free speech one... Her policy is nothing of the sort. There's a bill currently going through that will mean you can be tagged for even suggesting a demonstration. That is a shocker, even for this government." Yeah this Govt have been good at one thing...distraction. They shout about woke, lefty, cancel culture getting supporters all animated while through slight of hand they are slowly and gradually removing our democratic hard earned rights. It is classic fascist playbook. It is why so many dodgy legislation is spread across different bills. It is the collective that needs keeping an eye on as each small legislative change in and if itself seems fairly benign but together they start to add up to something seriously sinister. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"People are only trashing Braverman because she has good policies and may actually have the drive to implement them despite the obstructive Civil Servants in the Home Office. Do you have an example of her "good policies"? Brexit supporter, ECHR withdrawal, send migrants to Rwanda, reducing migration, for free speech, against the cancel culture which is infecting our society. Any more? Lol. I mean none of these can be considered "good" by any stretch of the imagination. Brexit: designed to fuck over ordinary people for the benefit of the ultra rich. Hardly a positive. ECHR withdrawal: removal of human rights. Generally considered not a good thing. Wasting hundreds of millions trafficking humans to Rwanda. Absolutely fucking horrific. Reducing migration, I assume you mean immigration? Hate based distraction politics. Again, not a good thing. Braverman is the queen of culture wars and cancel culture. She tried to cancel Twitter, Trans rights etc etc etc. If you have any more. I'm all ears. I think the point is. "People are trashing Braverman because she has good policies" is not accurate. That free speech one... Her policy is nothing of the sort. There's a bill currently going through that will mean you can be tagged for even suggesting a demonstration. That is a shocker, even for this government." Yeah the public order bill is SS territory. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"People are only trashing Braverman because she has good policies and may actually have the drive to implement them despite the obstructive Civil Servants in the Home Office. Do you have an example of her "good policies"? Brexit supporter, ECHR withdrawal, send migrants to Rwanda, reducing migration, for free speech, against the cancel culture which is infecting our society. Any more? Lol. I mean none of these can be considered "good" by any stretch of the imagination. Brexit: designed to fuck over ordinary people for the benefit of the ultra rich. Hardly a positive. ECHR withdrawal: removal of human rights. Generally considered not a good thing. Wasting hundreds of millions trafficking humans to Rwanda. Absolutely fucking horrific. Reducing migration, I assume you mean immigration? Hate based distraction politics. Again, not a good thing. Braverman is the queen of culture wars and cancel culture. She tried to cancel Twitter, Trans rights etc etc etc. If you have any more. I'm all ears. I think the point is. "People are trashing Braverman because she has good policies" is not accurate. That free speech one... Her policy is nothing of the sort. There's a bill currently going through that will mean you can be tagged for even suggesting a demonstration. That is a shocker, even for this government. Yeah this Govt have been good at one thing...distraction. They shout about woke, lefty, cancel culture getting supporters all animated while through slight of hand they are slowly and gradually removing our democratic hard earned rights. It is classic fascist playbook. It is why so many dodgy legislation is spread across different bills. It is the collective that needs keeping an eye on as each small legislative change in and if itself seems fairly benign but together they start to add up to something seriously sinister." Definitely. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"This whole narrative around leaving ECHR is plain weird. The UK and British lawyers were a core part and driving force in establishing the ECHR. The ECHR helps to protect us! You, me, everyone from an unaccountable state. People always focus on edge cases and outliers. Criminals or terrorists trying to use ECHR to avoid being penalised. But they don’t look into how it helps “normal people” and how one day they might need it. Always something that happens to someone else! " If we leave the ECHR (which is highly doubtful) labour will reverse it , so it is pointless | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Adolf Hitler Mein Kampf “The best way to take control over a people snd control them utterly is to take a little of their freedom at a time, to erode rights by a thousand tiny and almost imperceptible reductions. In this way, the people will not see those rights and freedoms being removed until past the point at which these changes cannot be reversed.”" Everything above is all about choice, the choice to vote and the choice to be governed. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Adolf Hitler Mein Kampf “The best way to take control over a people snd control them utterly is to take a little of their freedom at a time, to erode rights by a thousand tiny and almost imperceptible reductions. In this way, the people will not see those rights and freedoms being removed until past the point at which these changes cannot be reversed.” Everything above is all about choice, the choice to vote and the choice to be governed." Yes. People voted for the Nazis. Doesn't mean they were good. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Adolf Hitler Mein Kampf “The best way to take control over a people snd control them utterly is to take a little of their freedom at a time, to erode rights by a thousand tiny and almost imperceptible reductions. In this way, the people will not see those rights and freedoms being removed until past the point at which these changes cannot be reversed.” Everything above is all about choice, the choice to vote and the choice to be governed." Not following your train of thought there Buddy? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"This whole narrative around leaving ECHR is plain weird. The UK and British lawyers were a core part and driving force in establishing the ECHR. The ECHR helps to protect us! You, me, everyone from an unaccountable state. People always focus on edge cases and outliers. Criminals or terrorists trying to use ECHR to avoid being penalised. But they don’t look into how it helps “normal people” and how one day they might need it. Always something that happens to someone else! " So what is the solution? How do we stop the current situation where it is very difficult (if not impossible) to deport undesirables? The endless appeals supported by lefty lawyers on the gravy train who are onto every loophole in the legislation have completely undermined the point and legitimacy of of the legislation. The UK has always been at the forefront of human rights and managed perfectly well without the EHCR. GDPR is another thing needing reform. It detrimentally affects much of life, from knowing the previous owner of your car so you could return an item left in it or ask them for the history, to being used as an excuse for poor service. There was a big fuss a while ago because the NHS were giving details to the immigration service so people who had no right to be here could be found and deported. It was stopped due to the fuss but what is wrong with te policy? The people had no right to be here therefore no right to health care or privacy. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"l. And the majority of people vote as the media tells them to. IE, vote Conservative. Why else would they? Unless of course they donate to the party and win lucrative PPE contracts, and that sort of behaviour." These conspiracy bullshit really do make me laugh lol Any media I see has been critical of the conservatives for months. Maybe change your subscription or read more widely | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"This whole narrative around leaving ECHR is plain weird. The UK and British lawyers were a core part and driving force in establishing the ECHR. The ECHR helps to protect us! You, me, everyone from an unaccountable state. People always focus on edge cases and outliers. Criminals or terrorists trying to use ECHR to avoid being penalised. But they don’t look into how it helps “normal people” and how one day they might need it. Always something that happens to someone else! So what is the solution? How do we stop the current situation where it is very difficult (if not impossible) to deport undesirables? The endless appeals supported by lefty lawyers on the gravy train who are onto every loophole in the legislation have completely undermined the point and legitimacy of of the legislation. The UK has always been at the forefront of human rights and managed perfectly well without the EHCR. GDPR is another thing needing reform. It detrimentally affects much of life, from knowing the previous owner of your car so you could return an item left in it or ask them for the history, to being used as an excuse for poor service. There was a big fuss a while ago because the NHS were giving details to the immigration service so people who had no right to be here could be found and deported. It was stopped due to the fuss but what is wrong with te policy? The people had no right to be here therefore no right to health care or privacy." 1. Read the quote from Adolf Hitler 2. The case for the prosecution needs to be stronger or the defence lawyers can use the law to defend their clients 3. Why do you assume it is “lefty lawyers”? Plenty of “right lawyers” defending far right terrorists? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Adolf Hitler Mein Kampf “The best way to take control over a people snd control them utterly is to take a little of their freedom at a time, to erode rights by a thousand tiny and almost imperceptible reductions. In this way, the people will not see those rights and freedoms being removed until past the point at which these changes cannot be reversed.” Everything above is all about choice, the choice to vote and the choice to be governed. Not following your train of thought there Buddy?" They take control by the illusion of government and the willing to be governed voting. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"l. And the majority of people vote as the media tells them to. IE, vote Conservative. Why else would they? Unless of course they donate to the party and win lucrative PPE contracts, and that sort of behaviour. These conspiracy bullshit really do make me laugh lol Any media I see has been critical of the conservatives for months. Maybe change your subscription or read more widely " Check the media during a run up to an election. Medialens is a good site that analyses the media. They've done some good studies on this specific issue. Just because you don't like real life, doesn't mean it's a "conspiracy". | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Adolf Hitler Mein Kampf “The best way to take control over a people snd control them utterly is to take a little of their freedom at a time, to erode rights by a thousand tiny and almost imperceptible reductions. In this way, the people will not see those rights and freedoms being removed until past the point at which these changes cannot be reversed.” Everything above is all about choice, the choice to vote and the choice to be governed. Not following your train of thought there Buddy? They take control by the illusion of government and the willing to be governed voting." Aha! Yes smoke and mirrors. An illusion of democracy and will of the people/mandate! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"1. Read the quote from Adolf Hitler 2. The case for the prosecution needs to be stronger or the defence lawyers can use the law to defend their clients 3. Why do you assume it is “lefty lawyers”? Plenty of “right lawyers” defending far right terrorists?" Read the quote. The prosecution shouldn't really need much of a case - person is here illegally = case closed. Assuming anybody who arrives on a small boat is an illegal migrant is a good start - France is a beautiful country and we'd love to live there so why come to the UK unless you are trying to game the system? To me it seems that most immigration lawyers are left leaning, particularly the ones dealing with illegal immigrants and asylum seekers. Maybe compulsory ID cards is the way forward? As per several EU countries. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"1. Read the quote from Adolf Hitler 2. The case for the prosecution needs to be stronger or the defence lawyers can use the law to defend their clients 3. Why do you assume it is “lefty lawyers”? Plenty of “right lawyers” defending far right terrorists? Read the quote. The prosecution shouldn't really need much of a case - person is here illegally = case closed. Assuming anybody who arrives on a small boat is an illegal migrant is a good start - France is a beautiful country and we'd love to live there so why come to the UK unless you are trying to game the system? To me it seems that most immigration lawyers are left leaning, particularly the ones dealing with illegal immigrants and asylum seekers. Maybe compulsory ID cards is the way forward? As per several EU countries." The lawyers will lean In whatever direction best suits their interest / income. Kerrching! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"1. Read the quote from Adolf Hitler 2. The case for the prosecution needs to be stronger or the defence lawyers can use the law to defend their clients 3. Why do you assume it is “lefty lawyers”? Plenty of “right lawyers” defending far right terrorists? Read the quote. The prosecution shouldn't really need much of a case - person is here illegally = case closed. Assuming anybody who arrives on a small boat is an illegal migrant is a good start - France is a beautiful country and we'd love to live there so why come to the UK unless you are trying to game the system? To me it seems that most immigration lawyers are left leaning, particularly the ones dealing with illegal immigrants and asylum seekers. Maybe compulsory ID cards is the way forward? As per several EU countries. The lawyers will lean In whatever direction best suits their interest / income. Kerrching! " That is a fair point Seb. BTW why did you say on the other thread that Rushi Sunak isn’t British? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"1. Read the quote from Adolf Hitler 2. The case for the prosecution needs to be stronger or the defence lawyers can use the law to defend their clients 3. Why do you assume it is “lefty lawyers”? Plenty of “right lawyers” defending far right terrorists? Read the quote. The prosecution shouldn't really need much of a case - person is here illegally = case closed. Assuming anybody who arrives on a small boat is an illegal migrant is a good start - France is a beautiful country and we'd love to live there so why come to the UK unless you are trying to game the system? To me it seems that most immigration lawyers are left leaning, particularly the ones dealing with illegal immigrants and asylum seekers. Maybe compulsory ID cards is the way forward? As per several EU countries." So much to unpack there and only so much time in the day (when I should really be working - bloody lazy British workers heh). So it is immigration and the ECHR you are talking about? I am aware of criminals and terrorists using the law to stop deportation. Can you give me any examples of people coming over the channel in boats (not saying there isn’t just asking)? The whole point on being illegal is an interesting one as for the majority of these people there is no legal channel into the UK. If there was and it was controlled (with quotas) it would reduce the boat crossings and undermine the criminal gangs. The whole France thing is a trope. Most (not all) of the channel crossing immigrants are coming from countries with past colonial ties to the UK. These people generally have English as a second language. That is a major reason for the appeal of the UK. There are few, for example, Algerians. Why? Because they go to France because Algeria used to be part of the French Empire and their second language is French. Libyans go to Italy. Moroccans to Spain. Can you see the pattern? Yes there ARE outliers, apparently Albania, though not seem numbers or how they compare to Albanians going to other countries in Europe. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"This whole narrative around leaving ECHR is plain weird. The UK and British lawyers were a core part and driving force in establishing the ECHR. The ECHR helps to protect us! You, me, everyone from an unaccountable state. People always focus on edge cases and outliers. Criminals or terrorists trying to use ECHR to avoid being penalised. But they don’t look into how it helps “normal people” and how one day they might need it. Always something that happens to someone else! So what is the solution? How do we stop the current situation where it is very difficult (if not impossible) to deport undesirables? The endless appeals supported by lefty lawyers on the gravy train who are onto every loophole in the legislation have completely undermined the point and legitimacy of of the legislation. The UK has always been at the forefront of human rights and managed perfectly well without the EHCR. GDPR is another thing needing reform. It detrimentally affects much of life, from knowing the previous owner of your car so you could return an item left in it or ask them for the history, to being used as an excuse for poor service. There was a big fuss a while ago because the NHS were giving details to the immigration service so people who had no right to be here could be found and deported. It was stopped due to the fuss but what is wrong with te policy? The people had no right to be here therefore no right to health care or privacy." I'm afraid that you seem to view the law as a tool to achieve short term targets. Rather like Braverman (who is considered to be a terrible lawyer by other lawyers). This is typified by her expectation that government lawyers provide “solutions-based advice” rather than do their job which is to draft legislation and assess whether government policy is legal or not. The same laws applied in the same way protect you and I or a completely innocent immigrant as much as a criminal or a terrorist. The purpose of law is to apply the same test regardless of whether or not you "believe" someone does not "deserve" protection. It is an objective assessment in the same way that you cannot and should not convict someone of murder if there is insufficient evidence. All lawyers represent their clients by finding "loopholes" and novel interpretations in all areas of the law, not just immigration and not just "lefties". If that weren't possible there would be no lawyers or courts. The ECHR has been a part of UK law long before joining the EU. We joined in 1953 as the first signatory. Where do you get your information from? GDPR is a complicated piece of legislation, once again because everyone's data is treated confidentially unless permission is given. Again, the same rules are applied to everyone, even if it's inconvenient for you. Like all new legislation it will evolve over time. How would you even know that it "doesn't work" and needs changing in your opinion of it didn't exist at all? The NHS is not a branch of the immigration service. It's role is to treat those who need it equally. Rather like the law. You have heard of the Hippocratic oath? "I solemnly pledge that I will do my best to serve humanity – caring for the sick, promoting good health and alleviating pain and suffering. I will care for all patients equally and not allow prejudice to influence my practice. I will respect the autonomy and dignity of my patients, and will uphold their confidentiality. I will acknowledge my patients’ physical, psychological, and social needs and assist them to make informed decisions that reflect their own values and beliefs. I will respect, support and give gratitude to my teachers, colleagues and all those who sustain the NHS. I will reflect on my practice and recognise my limits. I will seek to increase my understanding and skills, and promote the advancement of medicine as both a teacher and a learner. I will work towards a fairer distribution of health resources and oppose policies in breach of human rights. I will look after my own physical, mental and emotional well-being in my personal and professional life. I shall never intentionally cause harm to my patients, and will have the utmost respect for human life. I will practice medicine with integrity, humility, honesty and compassion. I recognise that the practice of medicine is a privilege with which comes considerable responsibility and I will not abuse my position." Reporting people to the immigration services conflicts with more than one of these. You seem to want to make decisions based on an opinion on who is "deserving" and "undeserving" based on arbitrary value judgements. That will be fine if those "values" agree with yours. If another group is in power with different opinions to your own you will probably change your mind very quickly... | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"1. Read the quote from Adolf Hitler 2. The case for the prosecution needs to be stronger or the defence lawyers can use the law to defend their clients 3. Why do you assume it is “lefty lawyers”? Plenty of “right lawyers” defending far right terrorists? Read the quote. The prosecution shouldn't really need much of a case - person is here illegally = case closed. Assuming anybody who arrives on a small boat is an illegal migrant is a good start - France is a beautiful country and we'd love to live there so why come to the UK unless you are trying to game the system? To me it seems that most immigration lawyers are left leaning, particularly the ones dealing with illegal immigrants and asylum seekers. Maybe compulsory ID cards is the way forward? As per several EU countries." i dont disagree they are entering illegally. However that isn't reallybtje question that needs to be asked Is Rwanda a punishment for entering illegally ? If not, would you agree it is would stop an asylum seeker from claiming asylum to remain in the UK. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" If not, would you agree it is would stop an asylum seeker from claiming asylum to remain in the UK. " Maybe, but it achieves the same aim. Arrive illegally then you are deported unless you claim asylum. If you claim asylum you go to Rwanda, and if your claim is accepted you stay in Rwanda - otherwise deported. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" If not, would you agree it is would stop an asylum seeker from claiming asylum to remain in the UK. Maybe, but it achieves the same aim. Arrive illegally then you are deported unless you claim asylum. If you claim asylum you go to Rwanda, and if your claim is accepted you stay in Rwanda - otherwise deported." Why can’t someone claim asylum in the UK? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"1. Read the quote from Adolf Hitler 2. The case for the prosecution needs to be stronger or the defence lawyers can use the law to defend their clients 3. Why do you assume it is “lefty lawyers”? Plenty of “right lawyers” defending far right terrorists? Read the quote. The prosecution shouldn't really need much of a case - person is here illegally = case closed. Assuming anybody who arrives on a small boat is an illegal migrant is a good start - France is a beautiful country and we'd love to live there so why come to the UK unless you are trying to game the system? To me it seems that most immigration lawyers are left leaning, particularly the ones dealing with illegal immigrants and asylum seekers. Maybe compulsory ID cards is the way forward? As per several EU countries. The lawyers will lean In whatever direction best suits their interest / income. Kerrching! That is a fair point Seb. BTW why did you say on the other thread that Rushi Sunak isn’t British?" He is too frightened to answer that, however, I would also like to know if he thinks Braverman is British | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" If not, would you agree it is would stop an asylum seeker from claiming asylum to remain in the UK. Maybe, but it achieves the same aim. Arrive illegally then you are deported unless you claim asylum. If you claim asylum you go to Rwanda, and if your claim is accepted you stay in Rwanda - otherwise deported." You do realise that as part of the deal Rwvada send people back to the UK  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" If not, would you agree it is would stop an asylum seeker from claiming asylum to remain in the UK. Maybe, but it achieves the same aim. Arrive illegally then you are deported unless you claim asylum. If you claim asylum you go to Rwanda, and if your claim is accepted you stay in Rwanda - otherwise deported. You do realise that as part of the deal Rwvada send people back to the UK "Not according to the information I have seen. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" If not, would you agree it is would stop an asylum seeker from claiming asylum to remain in the UK. Maybe, but it achieves the same aim. Arrive illegally then you are deported unless you claim asylum. If you claim asylum you go to Rwanda, and if your claim is accepted you stay in Rwanda - otherwise deported. You do realise that as part of the deal Rwvada send people back to the UK
Not according to the information I have seen."‘Under the deal, Rwanda can also ask the UK to take in some of its most vulnerable refugees’ https://www.bbc.com/news/explainers-61782866.amp | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"1. Read the quote from Adolf Hitler 2. The case for the prosecution needs to be stronger or the defence lawyers can use the law to defend their clients 3. Why do you assume it is “lefty lawyers”? Plenty of “right lawyers” defending far right terrorists? Read the quote. The prosecution shouldn't really need much of a case - person is here illegally = case closed. Assuming anybody who arrives on a small boat is an illegal migrant is a good start - France is a beautiful country and we'd love to live there so why come to the UK unless you are trying to game the system? To me it seems that most immigration lawyers are left leaning, particularly the ones dealing with illegal immigrants and asylum seekers. Maybe compulsory ID cards is the way forward? As per several EU countries. The lawyers will lean In whatever direction best suits their interest / income. Kerrching! That is a fair point Seb. BTW why did you say on the other thread that Rushi Sunak isn’t British?" Crikey! You are a dog with a bone aren’t you. We all know that legally he is British. I think your assumption is that he is British because he was born here? On that assumption, Cliff Richard, Jo Lumley, Felicity Kendall must be Indian? I’m my mind he is not British enough to become PM and before all the race baiters come riding in it’s nothing to do with race or colour. His heritage suggests he has no attachment to this country, he would move with his family at the drop of a hat and without a single glance back to another continent or country if it suits him better at the time. He already has a home in California and of course while chancellor kept quiet for 18 months on his US residents status. Nothing wrong with that of course & good luck to him. It’s just not the right qualities to be the British PM. I hope he turns out to be brilliant and leads us to the sunlit uplands he was part of promising with his role in Brexit, time of course will tell. He or his family won’t be here to benefit or suffer. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" If not, would you agree it is would stop an asylum seeker from claiming asylum to remain in the UK. Maybe, but it achieves the same aim. Arrive illegally then you are deported unless you claim asylum. If you claim asylum you go to Rwanda, and if your claim is accepted you stay in Rwanda - otherwise deported. You do realise that as part of the deal Rwvada send people back to the UK
Not according to the information I have seen."I’m afraid it’s true. The whole thing is a disgusting sideshow and will not solve the scandal of tens of thousands (who knows how many?) of illegal immigrants coming to these shores with all of the resulting challenges. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"1. Read the quote from Adolf Hitler 2. The case for the prosecution needs to be stronger or the defence lawyers can use the law to defend their clients 3. Why do you assume it is “lefty lawyers”? Plenty of “right lawyers” defending far right terrorists? Read the quote. The prosecution shouldn't really need much of a case - person is here illegally = case closed. Assuming anybody who arrives on a small boat is an illegal migrant is a good start - France is a beautiful country and we'd love to live there so why come to the UK unless you are trying to game the system? To me it seems that most immigration lawyers are left leaning, particularly the ones dealing with illegal immigrants and asylum seekers. Maybe compulsory ID cards is the way forward? As per several EU countries. The lawyers will lean In whatever direction best suits their interest / income. Kerrching! That is a fair point Seb. BTW why did you say on the other thread that Rushi Sunak isn’t British? He is too frightened to answer that, however, I would also like to know if he thinks Braverman is British " Clearly she is. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" If not, would you agree it is would stop an asylum seeker from claiming asylum to remain in the UK. Maybe, but it achieves the same aim. Arrive illegally then you are deported unless you claim asylum. If you claim asylum you go to Rwanda, and if your claim is accepted you stay in Rwanda - otherwise deported. You do realise that as part of the deal Rwvada send people back to the UK
Not according to the information I have seen.
I’m afraid it’s true. The whole thing is a disgusting sideshow and will not solve the scandal of tens of thousands (who knows how many?) of illegal immigrants coming to these shores with all of the resulting challenges.
""a portion of the most vulnerable" So the policy has been sabotaged by the Civil Servants again. Using vague language to undermine it. And of course Rwanda only agreed to take 1000 initially anyway. So we need to start the Albania deportation flights ASAP. That returns a significant proportion. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"1. Read the quote from Adolf Hitler 2. The case for the prosecution needs to be stronger or the defence lawyers can use the law to defend their clients 3. Why do you assume it is “lefty lawyers”? Plenty of “right lawyers” defending far right terrorists? Read the quote. The prosecution shouldn't really need much of a case - person is here illegally = case closed. Assuming anybody who arrives on a small boat is an illegal migrant is a good start - France is a beautiful country and we'd love to live there so why come to the UK unless you are trying to game the system? To me it seems that most immigration lawyers are left leaning, particularly the ones dealing with illegal immigrants and asylum seekers. Maybe compulsory ID cards is the way forward? As per several EU countries. The lawyers will lean In whatever direction best suits their interest / income. Kerrching! That is a fair point Seb. BTW why did you say on the other thread that Rushi Sunak isn’t British? Crikey! You are a dog with a bone aren’t you. We all know that legally he is British. I think your assumption is that he is British because he was born here? On that assumption, Cliff Richard, Jo Lumley, Felicity Kendall must be Indian? I’m my mind he is not British enough to become PM and before all the race baiters come riding in it’s nothing to do with race or colour. His heritage suggests he has no attachment to this country, he would move with his family at the drop of a hat and without a single glance back to another continent or country if it suits him better at the time. He already has a home in California and of course while chancellor kept quiet for 18 months on his US residents status. Nothing wrong with that of course & good luck to him. It’s just not the right qualities to be the British PM. I hope he turns out to be brilliant and leads us to the sunlit uplands he was part of promising with his role in Brexit, time of course will tell. He or his family won’t be here to benefit or suffer. " I’m my mind he is not British enough to become PM and before all the race baiters come riding in it’s nothing to do with race or colour......he would move with his family at the drop of a hat and without a single glance back to another continent or country if it suits him better at the time. He already has a home in California and of course while chancellor kept quiet for 18 months on his US residents status. Standard Tory. Why does being a normal Conservative make him less British? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" If not, would you agree it is would stop an asylum seeker from claiming asylum to remain in the UK. Maybe, but it achieves the same aim. Arrive illegally then you are deported unless you claim asylum. If you claim asylum you go to Rwanda, and if your claim is accepted you stay in Rwanda - otherwise deported. You do realise that as part of the deal Rwvada send people back to the UK
Not according to the information I have seen.
I’m afraid it’s true. The whole thing is a disgusting sideshow and will not solve the scandal of tens of thousands (who knows how many?) of illegal immigrants coming to these shores with all of the resulting challenges.
"a portion of the most vulnerable"
So the policy has been sabotaged by the Civil Servants again. Using vague language to undermine it.
And of course Rwanda only agreed to take 1000 initially anyway.
So we need to start the Albania deportation flights ASAP. That returns a significant proportion."Or just stop worrying about foreigners, stop reading the Daily Mail, or whichever media that's telling you that a small number of immigrants is causing all your problems. Problem solved. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" If not, would you agree it is would stop an asylum seeker from claiming asylum to remain in the UK. Maybe, but it achieves the same aim. Arrive illegally then you are deported unless you claim asylum. If you claim asylum you go to Rwanda, and if your claim is accepted you stay in Rwanda - otherwise deported. You do realise that as part of the deal Rwvada send people back to the UK
Not according to the information I have seen.
I’m afraid it’s true. The whole thing is a disgusting sideshow and will not solve the scandal of tens of thousands (who knows how many?) of illegal immigrants coming to these shores with all of the resulting challenges.
"a portion of the most vulnerable"
So the policy has been sabotaged by the Civil Servants again. Using vague language to undermine it.
And of course Rwanda only agreed to take 1000 initially anyway.
So we need to start the Albania deportation flights ASAP. That returns a significant proportion.
Or just stop worrying about foreigners, stop reading the Daily Mail, or whichever media that's telling you that a small number of immigrants is causing all your problems.
Problem solved."You mean a ‘large number of illegal unknown immigrants’. Nobody is claiming it’s the cause of all problems. Stop being so disingenuous | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"1. Read the quote from Adolf Hitler 2. The case for the prosecution needs to be stronger or the defence lawyers can use the law to defend their clients 3. Why do you assume it is “lefty lawyers”? Plenty of “right lawyers” defending far right terrorists? Read the quote. The prosecution shouldn't really need much of a case - person is here illegally = case closed. Assuming anybody who arrives on a small boat is an illegal migrant is a good start - France is a beautiful country and we'd love to live there so why come to the UK unless you are trying to game the system? To me it seems that most immigration lawyers are left leaning, particularly the ones dealing with illegal immigrants and asylum seekers. Maybe compulsory ID cards is the way forward? As per several EU countries. The lawyers will lean In whatever direction best suits their interest / income. Kerrching! That is a fair point Seb. BTW why did you say on the other thread that Rushi Sunak isn’t British? He is too frightened to answer that, however, I would also like to know if he thinks Braverman is British Clearly she is. " Braverman - British Sunak - not biritsh They are both British  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"1. Read the quote from Adolf Hitler 2. The case for the prosecution needs to be stronger or the defence lawyers can use the law to defend their clients 3. Why do you assume it is “lefty lawyers”? Plenty of “right lawyers” defending far right terrorists? Read the quote. The prosecution shouldn't really need much of a case - person is here illegally = case closed. Assuming anybody who arrives on a small boat is an illegal migrant is a good start - France is a beautiful country and we'd love to live there so why come to the UK unless you are trying to game the system? To me it seems that most immigration lawyers are left leaning, particularly the ones dealing with illegal immigrants and asylum seekers. Maybe compulsory ID cards is the way forward? As per several EU countries. The lawyers will lean In whatever direction best suits their interest / income. Kerrching! That is a fair point Seb. BTW why did you say on the other thread that Rushi Sunak isn’t British? He is too frightened to answer that, however, I would also like to know if he thinks Braverman is British Clearly she is. Braverman - British Sunak - not biritsh They are both British "Thanks for your vital clarification & contribution. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"1. Read the quote from Adolf Hitler 2. The case for the prosecution needs to be stronger or the defence lawyers can use the law to defend their clients 3. Why do you assume it is “lefty lawyers”? Plenty of “right lawyers” defending far right terrorists? Read the quote. The prosecution shouldn't really need much of a case - person is here illegally = case closed. Assuming anybody who arrives on a small boat is an illegal migrant is a good start - France is a beautiful country and we'd love to live there so why come to the UK unless you are trying to game the system? To me it seems that most immigration lawyers are left leaning, particularly the ones dealing with illegal immigrants and asylum seekers. Maybe compulsory ID cards is the way forward? As per several EU countries. The lawyers will lean In whatever direction best suits their interest / income. Kerrching! That is a fair point Seb. BTW why did you say on the other thread that Rushi Sunak isn’t British? He is too frightened to answer that, however, I would also like to know if he thinks Braverman is British Clearly she is. Braverman - British Sunak - not biritsh They are both British
Thanks for your vital clarification & contribution. "Just accept the fact and stop making yourself look like an idiot | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"1. Read the quote from Adolf Hitler 2. The case for the prosecution needs to be stronger or the defence lawyers can use the law to defend their clients 3. Why do you assume it is “lefty lawyers”? Plenty of “right lawyers” defending far right terrorists? Read the quote. The prosecution shouldn't really need much of a case - person is here illegally = case closed. Assuming anybody who arrives on a small boat is an illegal migrant is a good start - France is a beautiful country and we'd love to live there so why come to the UK unless you are trying to game the system? To me it seems that most immigration lawyers are left leaning, particularly the ones dealing with illegal immigrants and asylum seekers. Maybe compulsory ID cards is the way forward? As per several EU countries. The lawyers will lean In whatever direction best suits their interest / income. Kerrching! That is a fair point Seb. BTW why did you say on the other thread that Rushi Sunak isn’t British? He is too frightened to answer that, however, I would also like to know if he thinks Braverman is British Clearly she is. Braverman - British Sunak - not biritsh They are both British
Thanks for your vital clarification & contribution.
Just accept the fact and stop making yourself look like an idiot "I think you’ll find I have. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"1. Read the quote from Adolf Hitler 2. The case for the prosecution needs to be stronger or the defence lawyers can use the law to defend their clients 3. Why do you assume it is “lefty lawyers”? Plenty of “right lawyers” defending far right terrorists? Read the quote. The prosecution shouldn't really need much of a case - person is here illegally = case closed. Assuming anybody who arrives on a small boat is an illegal migrant is a good start - France is a beautiful country and we'd love to live there so why come to the UK unless you are trying to game the system? To me it seems that most immigration lawyers are left leaning, particularly the ones dealing with illegal immigrants and asylum seekers. Maybe compulsory ID cards is the way forward? As per several EU countries. The lawyers will lean In whatever direction best suits their interest / income. Kerrching! That is a fair point Seb. BTW why did you say on the other thread that Rushi Sunak isn’t British? He is too frightened to answer that, however, I would also like to know if he thinks Braverman is British Clearly she is. Braverman - British Sunak - not biritsh They are both British
Thanks for your vital clarification & contribution.
Just accept the fact and stop making yourself look like an idiot
I think you’ll find I have."Ah, progress, that is good to see , we all get things wrong | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"1. Read the quote from Adolf Hitler 2. The case for the prosecution needs to be stronger or the defence lawyers can use the law to defend their clients 3. Why do you assume it is “lefty lawyers”? Plenty of “right lawyers” defending far right terrorists? Read the quote. The prosecution shouldn't really need much of a case - person is here illegally = case closed. Assuming anybody who arrives on a small boat is an illegal migrant is a good start - France is a beautiful country and we'd love to live there so why come to the UK unless you are trying to game the system? To me it seems that most immigration lawyers are left leaning, particularly the ones dealing with illegal immigrants and asylum seekers. Maybe compulsory ID cards is the way forward? As per several EU countries. The lawyers will lean In whatever direction best suits their interest / income. Kerrching! That is a fair point Seb. BTW why did you say on the other thread that Rushi Sunak isn’t British? Crikey! You are a dog with a bone aren’t you. We all know that legally he is British. I think your assumption is that he is British because he was born here? On that assumption, Cliff Richard, Jo Lumley, Felicity Kendall must be Indian? I’m my mind he is not British enough to become PM and before all the race baiters come riding in it’s nothing to do with race or colour. His heritage suggests he has no attachment to this country, he would move with his family at the drop of a hat and without a single glance back to another continent or country if it suits him better at the time. He already has a home in California and of course while chancellor kept quiet for 18 months on his US residents status. Nothing wrong with that of course & good luck to him. It’s just not the right qualities to be the British PM. I hope he turns out to be brilliant and leads us to the sunlit uplands he was part of promising with his role in Brexit, time of course will tell. He or his family won’t be here to benefit or suffer. " Clearly persistence paid off for this dog with a bone as you have finally explained yourself. You are conflating two different things. Rishi Sunak is objectively, legally and inarguably British. He was born and educated in the UK and holds British Citizenship. Whether he holds the right values, or is loyal to Britain or is fit to hold the highest office in UK Government is a wholly different matter. I agree with much you have said on that front and my objections to Sunak have been made abundantly clear on various threads in this forum. IMO his and his wife’s tax affairs are incompatible with the job he had as Chancellor and his new job as PM. It is clear from their actions that they have no particular affinity or long term loyalty to the UK. But he is still British. It isn’t ONLY place of birth so your point on Cliff and Joanna are moot points. I believe they both hold British citizenship no? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"1. Read the quote from Adolf Hitler 2. The case for the prosecution needs to be stronger or the defence lawyers can use the law to defend their clients 3. Why do you assume it is “lefty lawyers”? Plenty of “right lawyers” defending far right terrorists? Read the quote. The prosecution shouldn't really need much of a case - person is here illegally = case closed. Assuming anybody who arrives on a small boat is an illegal migrant is a good start - France is a beautiful country and we'd love to live there so why come to the UK unless you are trying to game the system? To me it seems that most immigration lawyers are left leaning, particularly the ones dealing with illegal immigrants and asylum seekers. Maybe compulsory ID cards is the way forward? As per several EU countries. The lawyers will lean In whatever direction best suits their interest / income. Kerrching! That is a fair point Seb. BTW why did you say on the other thread that Rushi Sunak isn’t British? He is too frightened to answer that, however, I would also like to know if he thinks Braverman is British Clearly she is. Braverman - British Sunak - not biritsh They are both British
Thanks for your vital clarification & contribution.
Just accept the fact and stop making yourself look like an idiot
I think you’ll find I have.
Ah, progress, that is good to see , we all get things wrong "Except for you of course. I stand by my view. You disagree. That’s allowed. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" If not, would you agree it is would stop an asylum seeker from claiming asylum to remain in the UK. Maybe, but it achieves the same aim. Arrive illegally then you are deported unless you claim asylum. If you claim asylum you go to Rwanda, and if your claim is accepted you stay in Rwanda - otherwise deported. You do realise that as part of the deal Rwvada send people back to the UK
Not according to the information I have seen.
I’m afraid it’s true. The whole thing is a disgusting sideshow and will not solve the scandal of tens of thousands (who knows how many?) of illegal immigrants coming to these shores with all of the resulting challenges.
"a portion of the most vulnerable"
So the policy has been sabotaged by the Civil Servants again. Using vague language to undermine it.
And of course Rwanda only agreed to take 1000 initially anyway.
So we need to start the Albania deportation flights ASAP. That returns a significant proportion."Why do you think Civil Servants sabotaged it? Strange view? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"1. Read the quote from Adolf Hitler 2. The case for the prosecution needs to be stronger or the defence lawyers can use the law to defend their clients 3. Why do you assume it is “lefty lawyers”? Plenty of “right lawyers” defending far right terrorists? Read the quote. The prosecution shouldn't really need much of a case - person is here illegally = case closed. Assuming anybody who arrives on a small boat is an illegal migrant is a good start - France is a beautiful country and we'd love to live there so why come to the UK unless you are trying to game the system? To me it seems that most immigration lawyers are left leaning, particularly the ones dealing with illegal immigrants and asylum seekers. Maybe compulsory ID cards is the way forward? As per several EU countries. The lawyers will lean In whatever direction best suits their interest / income. Kerrching! That is a fair point Seb. BTW why did you say on the other thread that Rushi Sunak isn’t British? He is too frightened to answer that, however, I would also like to know if he thinks Braverman is British Clearly she is. Braverman - British Sunak - not biritsh They are both British
Thanks for your vital clarification & contribution.
Just accept the fact and stop making yourself look like an idiot
I think you’ll find I have.
Ah, progress, that is good to see , we all get things wrong
Except for you of course. I stand by my view. You disagree. That’s allowed."You can stand by your view, but it is incorrect , this isn’t my view , it is a fact, however, are you saying that Sunak isn’t fit to be the British PM ? or are you saying he is unfit to be a British citizen? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"1. Read the quote from Adolf Hitler 2. The case for the prosecution needs to be stronger or the defence lawyers can use the law to defend their clients 3. Why do you assume it is “lefty lawyers”? Plenty of “right lawyers” defending far right terrorists? Read the quote. The prosecution shouldn't really need much of a case - person is here illegally = case closed. Assuming anybody who arrives on a small boat is an illegal migrant is a good start - France is a beautiful country and we'd love to live there so why come to the UK unless you are trying to game the system? To me it seems that most immigration lawyers are left leaning, particularly the ones dealing with illegal immigrants and asylum seekers. Maybe compulsory ID cards is the way forward? As per several EU countries. The lawyers will lean In whatever direction best suits their interest / income. Kerrching! That is a fair point Seb. BTW why did you say on the other thread that Rushi Sunak isn’t British? He is too frightened to answer that, however, I would also like to know if he thinks Braverman is British Clearly she is. Braverman - British Sunak - not biritsh They are both British
Thanks for your vital clarification & contribution.
Just accept the fact and stop making yourself look like an idiot
I think you’ll find I have.
Ah, progress, that is good to see , we all get things wrong
Except for you of course. I stand by my view. You disagree. That’s allowed.
You can stand by your view, but it is incorrect , this isn’t my view , it is a fact, however, are you saying that Sunak isn’t fit to be the British PM ? or are you saying he is unfit to be a British citizen? "I have explained my views. They remain ‘my views’. I haven’t said he’s unfit to be PM. Why does it bother you so? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"1. Read the quote from Adolf Hitler 2. The case for the prosecution needs to be stronger or the defence lawyers can use the law to defend their clients 3. Why do you assume it is “lefty lawyers”? Plenty of “right lawyers” defending far right terrorists? Read the quote. The prosecution shouldn't really need much of a case - person is here illegally = case closed. Assuming anybody who arrives on a small boat is an illegal migrant is a good start - France is a beautiful country and we'd love to live there so why come to the UK unless you are trying to game the system? To me it seems that most immigration lawyers are left leaning, particularly the ones dealing with illegal immigrants and asylum seekers. Maybe compulsory ID cards is the way forward? As per several EU countries. The lawyers will lean In whatever direction best suits their interest / income. Kerrching! That is a fair point Seb. BTW why did you say on the other thread that Rushi Sunak isn’t British? He is too frightened to answer that, however, I would also like to know if he thinks Braverman is British Clearly she is. Braverman - British Sunak - not biritsh They are both British
Thanks for your vital clarification & contribution.
Just accept the fact and stop making yourself look like an idiot
I think you’ll find I have.
Ah, progress, that is good to see , we all get things wrong
Except for you of course. I stand by my view. You disagree. That’s allowed.
You can stand by your view, but it is incorrect , this isn’t my view , it is a fact, however, are you saying that Sunak isn’t fit to be the British PM ? or are you saying he is unfit to be a British citizen?
I have explained my views. They remain ‘my views’.
I haven’t said he’s unfit to be PM. Why does it bother you so? "Because I have read and heard these ‘type’ of views recently online and on the radio and I want to try and understand the reasons why . Do you think that anyone who moves abroad for financial reasons/better themselves or even tax avoidance reasons isn’t British? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"1. Read the quote from Adolf Hitler 2. The case for the prosecution needs to be stronger or the defence lawyers can use the law to defend their clients 3. Why do you assume it is “lefty lawyers”? Plenty of “right lawyers” defending far right terrorists? Read the quote. The prosecution shouldn't really need much of a case - person is here illegally = case closed. Assuming anybody who arrives on a small boat is an illegal migrant is a good start - France is a beautiful country and we'd love to live there so why come to the UK unless you are trying to game the system? To me it seems that most immigration lawyers are left leaning, particularly the ones dealing with illegal immigrants and asylum seekers. Maybe compulsory ID cards is the way forward? As per several EU countries. The lawyers will lean In whatever direction best suits their interest / income. Kerrching! That is a fair point Seb. BTW why did you say on the other thread that Rushi Sunak isn’t British? He is too frightened to answer that, however, I would also like to know if he thinks Braverman is British Clearly she is. Braverman - British Sunak - not biritsh They are both British
Thanks for your vital clarification & contribution.
Just accept the fact and stop making yourself look like an idiot
I think you’ll find I have.
Ah, progress, that is good to see , we all get things wrong
Except for you of course. I stand by my view. You disagree. That’s allowed.
You can stand by your view, but it is incorrect , this isn’t my view , it is a fact, however, are you saying that Sunak isn’t fit to be the British PM ? or are you saying he is unfit to be a British citizen?
I have explained my views. They remain ‘my views’.
I haven’t said he’s unfit to be PM. Why does it bother you so?
Because I have read and heard these ‘type’ of views recently online and on the radio and I want to try and understand the reasons why . Do you think that anyone who moves abroad for financial reasons/better themselves or even tax avoidance reasons isn’t British? "Only British people . It’s human nature, and brave of people to move abroad and look to better themselves. Good for them, hats off to them in fact. I have no problem with that at all. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"1. Read the quote from Adolf Hitler 2. The case for the prosecution needs to be stronger or the defence lawyers can use the law to defend their clients 3. Why do you assume it is “lefty lawyers”? Plenty of “right lawyers” defending far right terrorists? Read the quote. The prosecution shouldn't really need much of a case - person is here illegally = case closed. Assuming anybody who arrives on a small boat is an illegal migrant is a good start - France is a beautiful country and we'd love to live there so why come to the UK unless you are trying to game the system? To me it seems that most immigration lawyers are left leaning, particularly the ones dealing with illegal immigrants and asylum seekers. Maybe compulsory ID cards is the way forward? As per several EU countries. The lawyers will lean In whatever direction best suits their interest / income. Kerrching! That is a fair point Seb. BTW why did you say on the other thread that Rushi Sunak isn’t British? He is too frightened to answer that, however, I would also like to know if he thinks Braverman is British Clearly she is. Braverman - British Sunak - not biritsh They are both British
Thanks for your vital clarification & contribution.
Just accept the fact and stop making yourself look like an idiot
I think you’ll find I have.
Ah, progress, that is good to see , we all get things wrong
Except for you of course. I stand by my view. You disagree. That’s allowed.
You can stand by your view, but it is incorrect , this isn’t my view , it is a fact, however, are you saying that Sunak isn’t fit to be the British PM ? or are you saying he is unfit to be a British citizen?
I have explained my views. They remain ‘my views’.
I haven’t said he’s unfit to be PM. Why does it bother you so?
Because I have read and heard these ‘type’ of views recently online and on the radio and I want to try and understand the reasons why . Do you think that anyone who moves abroad for financial reasons/better themselves or even tax avoidance reasons isn’t British?
Only British people . It’s human nature, and brave of people to move abroad and look to better themselves. Good for them, hats off to them in fact. I have no problem with that at all. "Only British people? If it’s ok to move abroad to better yourself or not pay tax in Britain then that makes Sunak British? Good for him, Hats of to him, | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"1. Read the quote from Adolf Hitler 2. The case for the prosecution needs to be stronger or the defence lawyers can use the law to defend their clients 3. Why do you assume it is “lefty lawyers”? Plenty of “right lawyers” defending far right terrorists? Read the quote. The prosecution shouldn't really need much of a case - person is here illegally = case closed. Assuming anybody who arrives on a small boat is an illegal migrant is a good start - France is a beautiful country and we'd love to live there so why come to the UK unless you are trying to game the system? To me it seems that most immigration lawyers are left leaning, particularly the ones dealing with illegal immigrants and asylum seekers. Maybe compulsory ID cards is the way forward? As per several EU countries. The lawyers will lean In whatever direction best suits their interest / income. Kerrching! That is a fair point Seb. BTW why did you say on the other thread that Rushi Sunak isn’t British? He is too frightened to answer that, however, I would also like to know if he thinks Braverman is British Clearly she is. Braverman - British Sunak - not biritsh They are both British
Thanks for your vital clarification & contribution.
Just accept the fact and stop making yourself look like an idiot
I think you’ll find I have.
Ah, progress, that is good to see , we all get things wrong
Except for you of course. I stand by my view. You disagree. That’s allowed.
You can stand by your view, but it is incorrect , this isn’t my view , it is a fact, however, are you saying that Sunak isn’t fit to be the British PM ? or are you saying he is unfit to be a British citizen?
I have explained my views. They remain ‘my views’.
I haven’t said he’s unfit to be PM. Why does it bother you so?
Because I have read and heard these ‘type’ of views recently online and on the radio and I want to try and understand the reasons why . Do you think that anyone who moves abroad for financial reasons/better themselves or even tax avoidance reasons isn’t British?
Only British people . It’s human nature, and brave of people to move abroad and look to better themselves. Good for them, hats off to them in fact. I have no problem with that at all.
Only British people? If it’s ok to move abroad to better yourself or not pay tax in Britain then that makes Sunak British? Good for him, Hats of to him, "Indeed. That’s that sorted then. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"1. Read the quote from Adolf Hitler 2. The case for the prosecution needs to be stronger or the defence lawyers can use the law to defend their clients 3. Why do you assume it is “lefty lawyers”? Plenty of “right lawyers” defending far right terrorists? Read the quote. The prosecution shouldn't really need much of a case - person is here illegally = case closed. Assuming anybody who arrives on a small boat is an illegal migrant is a good start - France is a beautiful country and we'd love to live there so why come to the UK unless you are trying to game the system? To me it seems that most immigration lawyers are left leaning, particularly the ones dealing with illegal immigrants and asylum seekers. Maybe compulsory ID cards is the way forward? As per several EU countries. The lawyers will lean In whatever direction best suits their interest / income. Kerrching! That is a fair point Seb. BTW why did you say on the other thread that Rushi Sunak isn’t British? He is too frightened to answer that, however, I would also like to know if he thinks Braverman is British Clearly she is. Braverman - British Sunak - not biritsh They are both British
Thanks for your vital clarification & contribution.
Just accept the fact and stop making yourself look like an idiot
I think you’ll find I have.
Ah, progress, that is good to see , we all get things wrong
Except for you of course. I stand by my view. You disagree. That’s allowed.
You can stand by your view, but it is incorrect , this isn’t my view , it is a fact, however, are you saying that Sunak isn’t fit to be the British PM ? or are you saying he is unfit to be a British citizen?
I have explained my views. They remain ‘my views’.
I haven’t said he’s unfit to be PM. Why does it bother you so?
Because I have read and heard these ‘type’ of views recently online and on the radio and I want to try and understand the reasons why . Do you think that anyone who moves abroad for financial reasons/better themselves or even tax avoidance reasons isn’t British?
Only British people . It’s human nature, and brave of people to move abroad and look to better themselves. Good for them, hats off to them in fact. I have no problem with that at all.
Only British people? If it’s ok to move abroad to better yourself or not pay tax in Britain then that makes Sunak British? Good for him, Hats of to him,
Indeed. That’s that sorted then. "Yep, tbh, I was hoping you were just confused and not a racist , | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"1. Read the quote from Adolf Hitler 2. The case for the prosecution needs to be stronger or the defence lawyers can use the law to defend their clients 3. Why do you assume it is “lefty lawyers”? Plenty of “right lawyers” defending far right terrorists? Read the quote. The prosecution shouldn't really need much of a case - person is here illegally = case closed. Assuming anybody who arrives on a small boat is an illegal migrant is a good start - France is a beautiful country and we'd love to live there so why come to the UK unless you are trying to game the system? To me it seems that most immigration lawyers are left leaning, particularly the ones dealing with illegal immigrants and asylum seekers. Maybe compulsory ID cards is the way forward? As per several EU countries. The lawyers will lean In whatever direction best suits their interest / income. Kerrching! That is a fair point Seb. BTW why did you say on the other thread that Rushi Sunak isn’t British? He is too frightened to answer that, however, I would also like to know if he thinks Braverman is British Clearly she is. Braverman - British Sunak - not biritsh They are both British
Thanks for your vital clarification & contribution.
Just accept the fact and stop making yourself look like an idiot
I think you’ll find I have.
Ah, progress, that is good to see , we all get things wrong
Except for you of course. I stand by my view. You disagree. That’s allowed.
You can stand by your view, but it is incorrect , this isn’t my view , it is a fact, however, are you saying that Sunak isn’t fit to be the British PM ? or are you saying he is unfit to be a British citizen?
I have explained my views. They remain ‘my views’.
I haven’t said he’s unfit to be PM. Why does it bother you so?
Because I have read and heard these ‘type’ of views recently online and on the radio and I want to try and understand the reasons why . Do you think that anyone who moves abroad for financial reasons/better themselves or even tax avoidance reasons isn’t British?
Only British people . It’s human nature, and brave of people to move abroad and look to better themselves. Good for them, hats off to them in fact. I have no problem with that at all.
Only British people? If it’s ok to move abroad to better yourself or not pay tax in Britain then that makes Sunak British? Good for him, Hats of to him,
Indeed. That’s that sorted then.
Yep, tbh, I was hoping you were just confused and not a racist , "Not sure if you are being deliberately thick or just being the devils avocado. In fact I’m not sure at all what point you are trying to make. Why would say,?an American moving to say France, be British? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"1. Read the quote from Adolf Hitler 2. The case for the prosecution needs to be stronger or the defence lawyers can use the law to defend their clients 3. Why do you assume it is “lefty lawyers”? Plenty of “right lawyers” defending far right terrorists? Read the quote. The prosecution shouldn't really need much of a case - person is here illegally = case closed. Assuming anybody who arrives on a small boat is an illegal migrant is a good start - France is a beautiful country and we'd love to live there so why come to the UK unless you are trying to game the system? To me it seems that most immigration lawyers are left leaning, particularly the ones dealing with illegal immigrants and asylum seekers. Maybe compulsory ID cards is the way forward? As per several EU countries. The lawyers will lean In whatever direction best suits their interest / income. Kerrching! That is a fair point Seb. BTW why did you say on the other thread that Rushi Sunak isn’t British? He is too frightened to answer that, however, I would also like to know if he thinks Braverman is British Clearly she is. Braverman - British Sunak - not biritsh They are both British
Thanks for your vital clarification & contribution.
Just accept the fact and stop making yourself look like an idiot
I think you’ll find I have.
Ah, progress, that is good to see , we all get things wrong
Except for you of course. I stand by my view. You disagree. That’s allowed.
You can stand by your view, but it is incorrect , this isn’t my view , it is a fact, however, are you saying that Sunak isn’t fit to be the British PM ? or are you saying he is unfit to be a British citizen?
I have explained my views. They remain ‘my views’.
I haven’t said he’s unfit to be PM. Why does it bother you so?
Because I have read and heard these ‘type’ of views recently online and on the radio and I want to try and understand the reasons why . Do you think that anyone who moves abroad for financial reasons/better themselves or even tax avoidance reasons isn’t British?
Only British people . It’s human nature, and brave of people to move abroad and look to better themselves. Good for them, hats off to them in fact. I have no problem with that at all.
Only British people? If it’s ok to move abroad to better yourself or not pay tax in Britain then that makes Sunak British? Good for him, Hats of to him,
Indeed. That’s that sorted then.
Yep, tbh, I was hoping you were just confused and not a racist ,
Not sure if you are being deliberately thick or just being the devils avocado. In fact I’m not sure at all what point you are trying to make.
Why would say,?an American moving to say France, be British? "Your confused again, at least we can both agree that Sunak is definitely British | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"This whole narrative around leaving ECHR is plain weird. The UK and British lawyers were a core part and driving force in establishing the ECHR. The ECHR helps to protect us! You, me, everyone from an unaccountable state. People always focus on edge cases and outliers. Criminals or terrorists trying to use ECHR to avoid being penalised. But they don’t look into how it helps “normal people” and how one day they might need it. Always something that happens to someone else! " This…. I don’t see why in a decent society why taking away someone’s rights is seen as a good thing…. Also ….. when it came to the European court, do people actually know what percentage of cases the uk government actually lost….. It was 3%….. 97% of time they agreed with the decision!!!!! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"1. Read the quote from Adolf Hitler 2. The case for the prosecution needs to be stronger or the defence lawyers can use the law to defend their clients 3. Why do you assume it is “lefty lawyers”? Plenty of “right lawyers” defending far right terrorists? Read the quote. The prosecution shouldn't really need much of a case - person is here illegally = case closed. Assuming anybody who arrives on a small boat is an illegal migrant is a good start - France is a beautiful country and we'd love to live there so why come to the UK unless you are trying to game the system? To me it seems that most immigration lawyers are left leaning, particularly the ones dealing with illegal immigrants and asylum seekers. Maybe compulsory ID cards is the way forward? As per several EU countries. The lawyers will lean In whatever direction best suits their interest / income. Kerrching! That is a fair point Seb. BTW why did you say on the other thread that Rushi Sunak isn’t British? He is too frightened to answer that, however, I would also like to know if he thinks Braverman is British Clearly she is. Braverman - British Sunak - not biritsh They are both British
Thanks for your vital clarification & contribution.
Just accept the fact and stop making yourself look like an idiot
I think you’ll find I have.
Ah, progress, that is good to see , we all get things wrong
Except for you of course. I stand by my view. You disagree. That’s allowed.
You can stand by your view, but it is incorrect , this isn’t my view , it is a fact, however, are you saying that Sunak isn’t fit to be the British PM ? or are you saying he is unfit to be a British citizen?
I have explained my views. They remain ‘my views’.
I haven’t said he’s unfit to be PM. Why does it bother you so?
Because I have read and heard these ‘type’ of views recently online and on the radio and I want to try and understand the reasons why . Do you think that anyone who moves abroad for financial reasons/better themselves or even tax avoidance reasons isn’t British?
Only British people . It’s human nature, and brave of people to move abroad and look to better themselves. Good for them, hats off to them in fact. I have no problem with that at all.
Only British people? If it’s ok to move abroad to better yourself or not pay tax in Britain then that makes Sunak British? Good for him, Hats of to him,
Indeed. That’s that sorted then.
Yep, tbh, I was hoping you were just confused and not a racist ,
Not sure if you are being deliberately thick or just being the devils avocado. In fact I’m not sure at all what point you are trying to make.
Why would say,?an American moving to say France, be British?
Your confused again, at least we can both agree that Sunak is definitely British "No confusion here. It’s all crystal. Puzzled by your obsession with racism though. You tend to give the impression that if someone is not on the beaches of Kent, welcoming anyone and who knows who from wherever, giving them a home ( why not throw in a Porsche as well?) then they must be racist. An odd obsession indeed. Still, it takes all sorts I guess. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" If not, would you agree it is would stop an asylum seeker from claiming asylum to remain in the UK. Maybe, but it achieves the same aim. Arrive illegally then you are deported unless you claim asylum. If you claim asylum you go to Rwanda, and if your claim is accepted you stay in Rwanda - otherwise deported. You do realise that as part of the deal Rwvada send people back to the UK
Not according to the information I have seen.
I’m afraid it’s true. The whole thing is a disgusting sideshow and will not solve the scandal of tens of thousands (who knows how many?) of illegal immigrants coming to these shores with all of the resulting challenges.
"a portion of the most vulnerable"
So the policy has been sabotaged by the Civil Servants again. Using vague language to undermine it.
And of course Rwanda only agreed to take 1000 initially anyway.
So we need to start the Albania deportation flights ASAP. That returns a significant proportion.
Or just stop worrying about foreigners, stop reading the Daily Mail, or whichever media that's telling you that a small number of immigrants is causing all your problems.
Problem solved.
You mean a ‘large number of illegal unknown immigrants’. Nobody is claiming it’s the cause of all problems. Stop being so disingenuous "I don't get conned by fear mongering media blaming foriegners as a distraction. So I'm not being disingenuous. But thanks for your concern | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"1. Read the quote from Adolf Hitler 2. The case for the prosecution needs to be stronger or the defence lawyers can use the law to defend their clients 3. Why do you assume it is “lefty lawyers”? Plenty of “right lawyers” defending far right terrorists? Read the quote. The prosecution shouldn't really need much of a case - person is here illegally = case closed. Assuming anybody who arrives on a small boat is an illegal migrant is a good start - France is a beautiful country and we'd love to live there so why come to the UK unless you are trying to game the system? To me it seems that most immigration lawyers are left leaning, particularly the ones dealing with illegal immigrants and asylum seekers. Maybe compulsory ID cards is the way forward? As per several EU countries. The lawyers will lean In whatever direction best suits their interest / income. Kerrching! That is a fair point Seb. BTW why did you say on the other thread that Rushi Sunak isn’t British? He is too frightened to answer that, however, I would also like to know if he thinks Braverman is British Clearly she is. Braverman - British Sunak - not biritsh They are both British
Thanks for your vital clarification & contribution. "Oh now we have to dig into this.. see if seb can square the circle here… So if “one” is of Indian heritage, one parent from Kenya and the other from Uganda…. And “one” is of Indian heritage, one parent from Kenya and one from Mauritius How is one British enough… and the other one not?? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"This whole narrative around leaving ECHR is plain weird. The UK and British lawyers were a core part and driving force in establishing the ECHR. The ECHR helps to protect us! You, me, everyone from an unaccountable state. People always focus on edge cases and outliers. Criminals or terrorists trying to use ECHR to avoid being penalised. But they don’t look into how it helps “normal people” and how one day they might need it. Always something that happens to someone else! This…. I don’t see why in a decent society why taking away someone’s rights is seen as a good thing…. Also ….. when it came to the European court, do people actually know what percentage of cases the uk government actually lost….. It was 3%….. 97% of time they agreed with the decision!!!!! " Timeframes are the issue. At the infamous, I have a dream meeting.. It was mentioned the scheme to deport to Rwanda will take years to implement as it travels through all of the appeals. Removing one of those appeal steps is a winner, if you looking to speed things up. What benefit does the ECHR play, if only 3% of cases are lost, this would indicate our systems are upholding the law as it should be, that is a remarkable figure. As mentioned above outliers are often used to extend or avoid punishment, that 3% indicates it is highly unlikely, so why go through that step, pay that expense, or drag out the time. To me the issue is very straight forward, one hand there is a need to lesson the time and effort, on the other hand it is a another chance to try and win, or at the very least lengthen the time to a loss. The solution could be to speed up the appeals process, everyone should be happy then, surely... I bet you're not though | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" If not, would you agree it is would stop an asylum seeker from claiming asylum to remain in the UK. Maybe, but it achieves the same aim. Arrive illegally then you are deported unless you claim asylum. If you claim asylum you go to Rwanda, and if your claim is accepted you stay in Rwanda - otherwise deported. You do realise that as part of the deal Rwvada send people back to the UK
Not according to the information I have seen.
I’m afraid it’s true. The whole thing is a disgusting sideshow and will not solve the scandal of tens of thousands (who knows how many?) of illegal immigrants coming to these shores with all of the resulting challenges.
"a portion of the most vulnerable"
So the policy has been sabotaged by the Civil Servants again. Using vague language to undermine it.
And of course Rwanda only agreed to take 1000 initially anyway.
So we need to start the Albania deportation flights ASAP. That returns a significant proportion.
Or just stop worrying about foreigners, stop reading the Daily Mail, or whichever media that's telling you that a small number of immigrants is causing all your problems.
Problem solved.
You mean a ‘large number of illegal unknown immigrants’. Nobody is claiming it’s the cause of all problems. Stop being so disingenuous
I don't get conned by fear mongering media blaming foriegners as a distraction. So I'm not being disingenuous.
But thanks for your concern"But the fear mongering is in your head. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"1. Read the quote from Adolf Hitler 2. The case for the prosecution needs to be stronger or the defence lawyers can use the law to defend their clients 3. Why do you assume it is “lefty lawyers”? Plenty of “right lawyers” defending far right terrorists? Read the quote. The prosecution shouldn't really need much of a case - person is here illegally = case closed. Assuming anybody who arrives on a small boat is an illegal migrant is a good start - France is a beautiful country and we'd love to live there so why come to the UK unless you are trying to game the system? To me it seems that most immigration lawyers are left leaning, particularly the ones dealing with illegal immigrants and asylum seekers. Maybe compulsory ID cards is the way forward? As per several EU countries. The lawyers will lean In whatever direction best suits their interest / income. Kerrching! That is a fair point Seb. BTW why did you say on the other thread that Rushi Sunak isn’t British? He is too frightened to answer that, however, I would also like to know if he thinks Braverman is British Clearly she is. Braverman - British Sunak - not biritsh They are both British
Thanks for your vital clarification & contribution.
Oh now we have to dig into this.. see if seb can square the circle here…
So if “one” is of Indian heritage, one parent from Kenya and the other from Uganda…. And “one” is of Indian heritage, one parent from Kenya and one from Mauritius
How is one British enough… and the other one not?? "Fabricate brought Braverman into the thread. No idea why. Nothing to square. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"1. Read the quote from Adolf Hitler 2. The case for the prosecution needs to be stronger or the defence lawyers can use the law to defend their clients 3. Why do you assume it is “lefty lawyers”? Plenty of “right lawyers” defending far right terrorists? Read the quote. The prosecution shouldn't really need much of a case - person is here illegally = case closed. Assuming anybody who arrives on a small boat is an illegal migrant is a good start - France is a beautiful country and we'd love to live there so why come to the UK unless you are trying to game the system? To me it seems that most immigration lawyers are left leaning, particularly the ones dealing with illegal immigrants and asylum seekers. Maybe compulsory ID cards is the way forward? As per several EU countries. The lawyers will lean In whatever direction best suits their interest / income. Kerrching! That is a fair point Seb. BTW why did you say on the other thread that Rushi Sunak isn’t British? He is too frightened to answer that, however, I would also like to know if he thinks Braverman is British Clearly she is. Braverman - British Sunak - not biritsh They are both British
Thanks for your vital clarification & contribution.
Just accept the fact and stop making yourself look like an idiot
I think you’ll find I have.
Ah, progress, that is good to see , we all get things wrong
Except for you of course. I stand by my view. You disagree. That’s allowed.
You can stand by your view, but it is incorrect , this isn’t my view , it is a fact, however, are you saying that Sunak isn’t fit to be the British PM ? or are you saying he is unfit to be a British citizen?
I have explained my views. They remain ‘my views’.
I haven’t said he’s unfit to be PM. Why does it bother you so?
Because I have read and heard these ‘type’ of views recently online and on the radio and I want to try and understand the reasons why . Do you think that anyone who moves abroad for financial reasons/better themselves or even tax avoidance reasons isn’t British?
Only British people . It’s human nature, and brave of people to move abroad and look to better themselves. Good for them, hats off to them in fact. I have no problem with that at all.
Only British people? If it’s ok to move abroad to better yourself or not pay tax in Britain then that makes Sunak British? Good for him, Hats of to him,
Indeed. That’s that sorted then.
Yep, tbh, I was hoping you were just confused and not a racist ,
Not sure if you are being deliberately thick or just being the devils avocado. In fact I’m not sure at all what point you are trying to make.
Why would say,?an American moving to say France, be British?
Your confused again, at least we can both agree that Sunak is definitely British
No confusion here. It’s all crystal.
Puzzled by your obsession with racism though. You tend to give the impression that if someone is not on the beaches of Kent, welcoming anyone and who knows who from wherever, giving them a home ( why not throw in a Porsche as well?) then they must be racist.
An odd obsession indeed. Still, it takes all sorts I guess."Nope, a racist is a person who thinks Rishi Sunak isn’t British | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Actually…. Seb…. Define what is “British enough” to be pm? How many generations do we need to go back? My folks are from the Caribbean…. Would I be British enough? " I thought you are an American? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"In a rare bit of positive news I think 2 men involved in grooming girls in the UK are finally to be deported (to Pakistan I think). This is after several years of claiming it would be a breach of their human rights. " Excellent news indeed | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Now I understand the view that Rishi doesn't have enough "commitment" to saying in the UK to be PM. I think that is what Seb is seeking to say. However I can't quite work out why he would say such a person isn't British. Nor why this is to do with his heritage. Both are odd turns of phrase. A bit grampa-y. " His heritage shows no commitment to any country. There is nothing to suggest he has any ties or commitments to this country . His parents and grandparents upped and left for other shores as it suited them financially. As I said earlier, great and brave of them to do that. Not good as Prime minister though. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"1. Read the quote from Adolf Hitler 2. The case for the prosecution needs to be stronger or the defence lawyers can use the law to defend their clients 3. Why do you assume it is “lefty lawyers”? Plenty of “right lawyers” defending far right terrorists? Read the quote. The prosecution shouldn't really need much of a case - person is here illegally = case closed. Assuming anybody who arrives on a small boat is an illegal migrant is a good start - France is a beautiful country and we'd love to live there so why come to the UK unless you are trying to game the system? To me it seems that most immigration lawyers are left leaning, particularly the ones dealing with illegal immigrants and asylum seekers. Maybe compulsory ID cards is the way forward? As per several EU countries. The lawyers will lean In whatever direction best suits their interest / income. Kerrching! That is a fair point Seb. BTW why did you say on the other thread that Rushi Sunak isn’t British? He is too frightened to answer that, however, I would also like to know if he thinks Braverman is British Clearly she is. Braverman - British Sunak - not biritsh They are both British
Thanks for your vital clarification & contribution.
Just accept the fact and stop making yourself look like an idiot
I think you’ll find I have.
Ah, progress, that is good to see , we all get things wrong
Except for you of course. I stand by my view. You disagree. That’s allowed.
You can stand by your view, but it is incorrect , this isn’t my view , it is a fact, however, are you saying that Sunak isn’t fit to be the British PM ? or are you saying he is unfit to be a British citizen?
I have explained my views. They remain ‘my views’.
I haven’t said he’s unfit to be PM. Why does it bother you so?
Because I have read and heard these ‘type’ of views recently online and on the radio and I want to try and understand the reasons why . Do you think that anyone who moves abroad for financial reasons/better themselves or even tax avoidance reasons isn’t British?
Only British people . It’s human nature, and brave of people to move abroad and look to better themselves. Good for them, hats off to them in fact. I have no problem with that at all.
Only British people? If it’s ok to move abroad to better yourself or not pay tax in Britain then that makes Sunak British? Good for him, Hats of to him,
Indeed. That’s that sorted then.
Yep, tbh, I was hoping you were just confused and not a racist ,
Not sure if you are being deliberately thick or just being the devils avocado. In fact I’m not sure at all what point you are trying to make.
Why would say,?an American moving to say France, be British?
Your confused again, at least we can both agree that Sunak is definitely British
No confusion here. It’s all crystal.
Puzzled by your obsession with racism though. You tend to give the impression that if someone is not on the beaches of Kent, welcoming anyone and who knows who from wherever, giving them a home ( why not throw in a Porsche as well?) then they must be racist.
An odd obsession indeed. Still, it takes all sorts I guess.
Nope, a racist is a person who thinks Rishi Sunak isn’t British "Please stop being so rude & race baiting. Do you think it will help you get a shag or something? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Now I understand the view that Rishi doesn't have enough "commitment" to saying in the UK to be PM. I think that is what Seb is seeking to say. However I can't quite work out why he would say such a person isn't British. Nor why this is to do with his heritage. Both are odd turns of phrase. A bit grampa-y. His heritage shows no commitment to any country. There is nothing to suggest he has any ties or commitments to this country . His parents and grandparents upped and left for other shores as it suited them financially. As I said earlier, great and brave of them to do that. Not good as Prime minister though." what we need is a PM who's parentwvshiw loyalty and didn't upsticks ti France and get a French citizenship after Brexit. Presumably no children if immigrants are therefore committed enough to be the PM. How many generations need to be British to show they have a committed heritage ? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Now I understand the view that Rishi doesn't have enough "commitment" to saying in the UK to be PM. I think that is what Seb is seeking to say. However I can't quite work out why he would say such a person isn't British. Nor why this is to do with his heritage. Both are odd turns of phrase. A bit grampa-y. " I am going to name 4 different events during the time Boris Johnson was a major political figure 1) the London riots 2) exiting of Afghanistan 3) this summer’s cost of living crisis 4) this 2nd Tory leadership contest He just happened to be on holiday whilst all 4 were taking place… coincidence… But which 1 of the 4 did he actually cut his holiday short for and come back? Interesting when we talk about “commitment to the country” | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Now I understand the view that Rishi doesn't have enough "commitment" to saying in the UK to be PM. I think that is what Seb is seeking to say. However I can't quite work out why he would say such a person isn't British. Nor why this is to do with his heritage. Both are odd turns of phrase. A bit grampa-y. I am going to name 4 different events during the time Boris Johnson was a major political figure 1) the London riots 2) exiting of Afghanistan 3) this summer’s cost of living crisis 4) this 2nd Tory leadership contest He just happened to be on holiday whilst all 4 were taking place… coincidence… But which 1 of the 4 did he actually cut his holiday short for and come back? Interesting when we talk about “commitment to the country” " Exactly, does that mean Boris Isn’t British? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Now I understand the view that Rishi doesn't have enough "commitment" to saying in the UK to be PM. I think that is what Seb is seeking to say. However I can't quite work out why he would say such a person isn't British. Nor why this is to do with his heritage. Both are odd turns of phrase. A bit grampa-y. His heritage shows no commitment to any country. There is nothing to suggest he has any ties or commitments to this country . His parents and grandparents upped and left for other shores as it suited them financially. As I said earlier, great and brave of them to do that. Not good as Prime minister though." So Suella would not be British enough to be a prime minister either? But she is British enough for to basically be interior minister, and he was British enough to basically be the finance minister? So they are either British enough to be in politics, or they are not? So… where does the line stand? Every job except PM? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" If not, would you agree it is would stop an asylum seeker from claiming asylum to remain in the UK. Maybe, but it achieves the same aim. Arrive illegally then you are deported unless you claim asylum. If you claim asylum you go to Rwanda, and if your claim is accepted you stay in Rwanda - otherwise deported. You do realise that as part of the deal Rwvada send people back to the UK
Not according to the information I have seen.
I’m afraid it’s true. The whole thing is a disgusting sideshow and will not solve the scandal of tens of thousands (who knows how many?) of illegal immigrants coming to these shores with all of the resulting challenges.
"a portion of the most vulnerable"
So the policy has been sabotaged by the Civil Servants again. Using vague language to undermine it.
And of course Rwanda only agreed to take 1000 initially anyway.
So we need to start the Albania deportation flights ASAP. That returns a significant proportion.
Or just stop worrying about foreigners, stop reading the Daily Mail, or whichever media that's telling you that a small number of immigrants is causing all your problems.
Problem solved.
You mean a ‘large number of illegal unknown immigrants’. Nobody is claiming it’s the cause of all problems. Stop being so disingenuous
I don't get conned by fear mongering media blaming foriegners as a distraction. So I'm not being disingenuous.
But thanks for your concern
But the fear mongering is in your head. "Nope. It's in all the Daily Mail etc and it's in all your threads and posts complaining about foriegners. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" If not, would you agree it is would stop an asylum seeker from claiming asylum to remain in the UK. Maybe, but it achieves the same aim. Arrive illegally then you are deported unless you claim asylum. If you claim asylum you go to Rwanda, and if your claim is accepted you stay in Rwanda - otherwise deported. You do realise that as part of the deal Rwvada send people back to the UK
Not according to the information I have seen.
I’m afraid it’s true. The whole thing is a disgusting sideshow and will not solve the scandal of tens of thousands (who knows how many?) of illegal immigrants coming to these shores with all of the resulting challenges.
"a portion of the most vulnerable"
So the policy has been sabotaged by the Civil Servants again. Using vague language to undermine it.
And of course Rwanda only agreed to take 1000 initially anyway.
So we need to start the Albania deportation flights ASAP. That returns a significant proportion.
Or just stop worrying about foreigners, stop reading the Daily Mail, or whichever media that's telling you that a small number of immigrants is causing all your problems.
Problem solved.
You mean a ‘large number of illegal unknown immigrants’. Nobody is claiming it’s the cause of all problems. Stop being so disingenuous
I don't get conned by fear mongering media blaming foriegners as a distraction. So I'm not being disingenuous.
But thanks for your concern
But the fear mongering is in your head.
Nope. It's in all the Daily Mail etc and it's in all your threads and posts complaining about foriegners."You got that right | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" If not, would you agree it is would stop an asylum seeker from claiming asylum to remain in the UK. Maybe, but it achieves the same aim. Arrive illegally then you are deported unless you claim asylum. If you claim asylum you go to Rwanda, and if your claim is accepted you stay in Rwanda - otherwise deported. You do realise that as part of the deal Rwvada send people back to the UK
Not according to the information I have seen.
I’m afraid it’s true. The whole thing is a disgusting sideshow and will not solve the scandal of tens of thousands (who knows how many?) of illegal immigrants coming to these shores with all of the resulting challenges.
"a portion of the most vulnerable"
So the policy has been sabotaged by the Civil Servants again. Using vague language to undermine it.
And of course Rwanda only agreed to take 1000 initially anyway.
So we need to start the Albania deportation flights ASAP. That returns a significant proportion.
Or just stop worrying about foreigners, stop reading the Daily Mail, or whichever media that's telling you that a small number of immigrants is causing all your problems.
Problem solved.
You mean a ‘large number of illegal unknown immigrants’. Nobody is claiming it’s the cause of all problems. Stop being so disingenuous
I don't get conned by fear mongering media blaming foriegners as a distraction. So I'm not being disingenuous.
But thanks for your concern
But the fear mongering is in your head.
Nope. It's in all the Daily Mail etc and it's in all your threads and posts complaining about foriegners."You have a strange obsession with a national newspaper and a disingenuous way of exaggerating how things are reported to suit your narrative. I have no problem with ‘foreigners’, that would be odd as there are eight billion of them. I do have a problem with any mad bad chancers that choose to come to these shores, by illegal means or by bucking the system. As indeed should you. It would be reckless not to, as recent events show. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Now I understand the view that Rishi doesn't have enough "commitment" to saying in the UK to be PM. I think that is what Seb is seeking to say. However I can't quite work out why he would say such a person isn't British. Nor why this is to do with his heritage. Both are odd turns of phrase. A bit grampa-y. I am going to name 4 different events during the time Boris Johnson was a major political figure 1) the London riots 2) exiting of Afghanistan 3) this summer’s cost of living crisis 4) this 2nd Tory leadership contest He just happened to be on holiday whilst all 4 were taking place… coincidence… But which 1 of the 4 did he actually cut his holiday short for and come back? Interesting when we talk about “commitment to the country” Exactly, does that mean Boris Isn’t British? " On your logic, he must be American as he was born there. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" If not, would you agree it is would stop an asylum seeker from claiming asylum to remain in the UK. Maybe, but it achieves the same aim. Arrive illegally then you are deported unless you claim asylum. If you claim asylum you go to Rwanda, and if your claim is accepted you stay in Rwanda - otherwise deported. You do realise that as part of the deal Rwvada send people back to the UK
Not according to the information I have seen.
I’m afraid it’s true. The whole thing is a disgusting sideshow and will not solve the scandal of tens of thousands (who knows how many?) of illegal immigrants coming to these shores with all of the resulting challenges.
"a portion of the most vulnerable"
So the policy has been sabotaged by the Civil Servants again. Using vague language to undermine it.
And of course Rwanda only agreed to take 1000 initially anyway.
So we need to start the Albania deportation flights ASAP. That returns a significant proportion.
Or just stop worrying about foreigners, stop reading the Daily Mail, or whichever media that's telling you that a small number of immigrants is causing all your problems.
Problem solved.
You mean a ‘large number of illegal unknown immigrants’. Nobody is claiming it’s the cause of all problems. Stop being so disingenuous
I don't get conned by fear mongering media blaming foriegners as a distraction. So I'm not being disingenuous.
But thanks for your concern
But the fear mongering is in your head.
Nope. It's in all the Daily Mail etc and it's in all your threads and posts complaining about foriegners.
You have a strange obsession with a national newspaper and a disingenuous way of exaggerating how things are reported to suit your narrative. I have no problem with ‘foreigners’, that would be odd as there are eight billion of them.
I do have a problem with any mad bad chancers that choose to come to these shores, by illegal means or by bucking the system. As indeed should you. It would be reckless not to, as recent events show. "You appear to be: A. Suggesting that the Daily Mail doesn't whip up outrage about foriegners. And B. Arguing with yourself. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Now I understand the view that Rishi doesn't have enough "commitment" to saying in the UK to be PM. I think that is what Seb is seeking to say. However I can't quite work out why he would say such a person isn't British. Nor why this is to do with his heritage. Both are odd turns of phrase. A bit grampa-y. I am going to name 4 different events during the time Boris Johnson was a major political figure 1) the London riots 2) exiting of Afghanistan 3) this summer’s cost of living crisis 4) this 2nd Tory leadership contest He just happened to be on holiday whilst all 4 were taking place… coincidence… But which 1 of the 4 did he actually cut his holiday short for and come back? Interesting when we talk about “commitment to the country” Exactly, does that mean Boris Isn’t British? On your logic, he must be American as he was born there. " He is definitely British , however he doesn’t care about the country, he was born in America, his father is a French citizen? Do you think he is British? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" If not, would you agree it is would stop an asylum seeker from claiming asylum to remain in the UK. Maybe, but it achieves the same aim. Arrive illegally then you are deported unless you claim asylum. If you claim asylum you go to Rwanda, and if your claim is accepted you stay in Rwanda - otherwise deported. You do realise that as part of the deal Rwvada send people back to the UK
Not according to the information I have seen.
I’m afraid it’s true. The whole thing is a disgusting sideshow and will not solve the scandal of tens of thousands (who knows how many?) of illegal immigrants coming to these shores with all of the resulting challenges.
"a portion of the most vulnerable"
So the policy has been sabotaged by the Civil Servants again. Using vague language to undermine it.
And of course Rwanda only agreed to take 1000 initially anyway.
So we need to start the Albania deportation flights ASAP. That returns a significant proportion.
Or just stop worrying about foreigners, stop reading the Daily Mail, or whichever media that's telling you that a small number of immigrants is causing all your problems.
Problem solved.
You mean a ‘large number of illegal unknown immigrants’. Nobody is claiming it’s the cause of all problems. Stop being so disingenuous
I don't get conned by fear mongering media blaming foriegners as a distraction. So I'm not being disingenuous.
But thanks for your concern
But the fear mongering is in your head.
Nope. It's in all the Daily Mail etc and it's in all your threads and posts complaining about foriegners.
You have a strange obsession with a national newspaper and a disingenuous way of exaggerating how things are reported to suit your narrative. I have no problem with ‘foreigners’, that would be odd as there are eight billion of them.
I do have a problem with any mad bad chancers that choose to come to these shores, by illegal means or by bucking the system. As indeed should you. It would be reckless not to, as recent events show.
You appear to be:
A. Suggesting that the Daily Mail doesn't whip up outrage about foriegners.
And
B. Arguing with yourself.
"Nothing of the sort. Seek help, or form a higher opinion of the public. They are not as influenced as you by a newspaper. People are allowed to have and to air a different opinion to you, it’s still allowed to agree to disagree. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Now I understand the view that Rishi doesn't have enough "commitment" to saying in the UK to be PM. I think that is what Seb is seeking to say. However I can't quite work out why he would say such a person isn't British. Nor why this is to do with his heritage. Both are odd turns of phrase. A bit grampa-y. I am going to name 4 different events during the time Boris Johnson was a major political figure 1) the London riots 2) exiting of Afghanistan 3) this summer’s cost of living crisis 4) this 2nd Tory leadership contest He just happened to be on holiday whilst all 4 were taking place… coincidence… But which 1 of the 4 did he actually cut his holiday short for and come back? Interesting when we talk about “commitment to the country” Exactly, does that mean Boris Isn’t British? On your logic, he must be American as he was born there. He is definitely British , however he doesn’t care about the country, he was born in America, his father is a French citizen? Do you think he is British? " He’s ‘cuntish’ and that’s one of the few things we will ever agree on. The worst sort of PM ever. A proven liar , a career politician & chancer on the make. Do you think his Dad is French? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Now I understand the view that Rishi doesn't have enough "commitment" to saying in the UK to be PM. I think that is what Seb is seeking to say. However I can't quite work out why he would say such a person isn't British. Nor why this is to do with his heritage. Both are odd turns of phrase. A bit grampa-y. I am going to name 4 different events during the time Boris Johnson was a major political figure 1) the London riots 2) exiting of Afghanistan 3) this summer’s cost of living crisis 4) this 2nd Tory leadership contest He just happened to be on holiday whilst all 4 were taking place… coincidence… But which 1 of the 4 did he actually cut his holiday short for and come back? Interesting when we talk about “commitment to the country” Exactly, does that mean Boris Isn’t British? On your logic, he must be American as he was born there. He is definitely British , however he doesn’t care about the country, he was born in America, his father is a French citizen? Do you think he is British? He’s ‘cuntish’ and that’s one of the few things we will ever agree on. The worst sort of PM ever. A proven liar , a career politician & chancer on the make. Do you think his Dad is French? " His dad is French and British , he lives there and has French citizenship . I will ask again, do you think Boris is British ? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Now I understand the view that Rishi doesn't have enough "commitment" to saying in the UK to be PM. I think that is what Seb is seeking to say. However I can't quite work out why he would say such a person isn't British. Nor why this is to do with his heritage. Both are odd turns of phrase. A bit grampa-y. I am going to name 4 different events during the time Boris Johnson was a major political figure 1) the London riots 2) exiting of Afghanistan 3) this summer’s cost of living crisis 4) this 2nd Tory leadership contest He just happened to be on holiday whilst all 4 were taking place… coincidence… But which 1 of the 4 did he actually cut his holiday short for and come back? Interesting when we talk about “commitment to the country” Exactly, does that mean Boris Isn’t British? On your logic, he must be American as he was born there. He is definitely British , however he doesn’t care about the country, he was born in America, his father is a French citizen? Do you think he is British? He’s ‘cuntish’ and that’s one of the few things we will ever agree on. The worst sort of PM ever. A proven liar , a career politician & chancer on the make. Do you think his Dad is French? His dad is French and British , he lives there and has French citizenship . I will ask again, do you think Boris is British ? " But he’s clearly not French. Do I think Boris is British? Yes. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" If not, would you agree it is would stop an asylum seeker from claiming asylum to remain in the UK. Maybe, but it achieves the same aim. Arrive illegally then you are deported unless you claim asylum. If you claim asylum you go to Rwanda, and if your claim is accepted you stay in Rwanda - otherwise deported. You do realise that as part of the deal Rwvada send people back to the UK
Not according to the information I have seen.
I’m afraid it’s true. The whole thing is a disgusting sideshow and will not solve the scandal of tens of thousands (who knows how many?) of illegal immigrants coming to these shores with all of the resulting challenges.
"a portion of the most vulnerable"
So the policy has been sabotaged by the Civil Servants again. Using vague language to undermine it.
And of course Rwanda only agreed to take 1000 initially anyway.
So we need to start the Albania deportation flights ASAP. That returns a significant proportion.
Or just stop worrying about foreigners, stop reading the Daily Mail, or whichever media that's telling you that a small number of immigrants is causing all your problems.
Problem solved.
You mean a ‘large number of illegal unknown immigrants’. Nobody is claiming it’s the cause of all problems. Stop being so disingenuous
I don't get conned by fear mongering media blaming foriegners as a distraction. So I'm not being disingenuous.
But thanks for your concern
But the fear mongering is in your head.
Nope. It's in all the Daily Mail etc and it's in all your threads and posts complaining about foriegners.
You have a strange obsession with a national newspaper and a disingenuous way of exaggerating how things are reported to suit your narrative. I have no problem with ‘foreigners’, that would be odd as there are eight billion of them.
I do have a problem with any mad bad chancers that choose to come to these shores, by illegal means or by bucking the system. As indeed should you. It would be reckless not to, as recent events show.
You appear to be:
A. Suggesting that the Daily Mail doesn't whip up outrage about foriegners.
And
B. Arguing with yourself.
Nothing of the sort. Seek help, or form a higher opinion of the public. They are not as influenced as you by a newspaper.
People are allowed to have and to air a different opinion to you, it’s still allowed to agree to disagree. "You appear to be confused. The only opinion I am offering, is on your posts, and the things you say on here. I do not need to "seek help". What a ridiculous thing to say. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Now I understand the view that Rishi doesn't have enough "commitment" to saying in the UK to be PM. I think that is what Seb is seeking to say. However I can't quite work out why he would say such a person isn't British. Nor why this is to do with his heritage. Both are odd turns of phrase. A bit grampa-y. I am going to name 4 different events during the time Boris Johnson was a major political figure 1) the London riots 2) exiting of Afghanistan 3) this summer’s cost of living crisis 4) this 2nd Tory leadership contest He just happened to be on holiday whilst all 4 were taking place… coincidence… But which 1 of the 4 did he actually cut his holiday short for and come back? Interesting when we talk about “commitment to the country” Exactly, does that mean Boris Isn’t British? On your logic, he must be American as he was born there. He is definitely British , however he doesn’t care about the country, he was born in America, his father is a French citizen? Do you think he is British? He’s ‘cuntish’ and that’s one of the few things we will ever agree on. The worst sort of PM ever. A proven liar , a career politician & chancer on the make. Do you think his Dad is French? His dad is French and British , he lives there and has French citizenship . I will ask again, do you think Boris is British ? But he’s clearly not French. Do I think Boris is British? Yes." He is French /British, the French government have granted him citizenship, they know more about the process than you do. So you still think Sunak isn’t British, but Boris is? what is the difference between them ? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Now I understand the view that Rishi doesn't have enough "commitment" to saying in the UK to be PM. I think that is what Seb is seeking to say. However I can't quite work out why he would say such a person isn't British. Nor why this is to do with his heritage. Both are odd turns of phrase. A bit grampa-y. I am going to name 4 different events during the time Boris Johnson was a major political figure 1) the London riots 2) exiting of Afghanistan 3) this summer’s cost of living crisis 4) this 2nd Tory leadership contest He just happened to be on holiday whilst all 4 were taking place… coincidence… But which 1 of the 4 did he actually cut his holiday short for and come back? Interesting when we talk about “commitment to the country” Exactly, does that mean Boris Isn’t British? On your logic, he must be American as he was born there. He is definitely British , however he doesn’t care about the country, he was born in America, his father is a French citizen? Do you think he is British? He’s ‘cuntish’ and that’s one of the few things we will ever agree on. The worst sort of PM ever. A proven liar , a career politician & chancer on the make. Do you think his Dad is French? His dad is French and British , he lives there and has French citizenship . I will ask again, do you think Boris is British ? But he’s clearly not French. Do I think Boris is British? Yes. He is French /British, the French government have granted him citizenship, they know more about the process than you do. So you still think Sunak isn’t British, but Boris is? what is the difference between them ? " If you scroll back I have conceded that he is British. Is it wrong to want those running the country to have a vested, personal & historic interest in it? Close & extended family that won’t switch continents at the drop of a hat? Give up on your obsession with skin colour. You are better than that. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" If not, would you agree it is would stop an asylum seeker from claiming asylum to remain in the UK. Maybe, but it achieves the same aim. Arrive illegally then you are deported unless you claim asylum. If you claim asylum you go to Rwanda, and if your claim is accepted you stay in Rwanda - otherwise deported. You do realise that as part of the deal Rwvada send people back to the UK
Not according to the information I have seen.
I’m afraid it’s true. The whole thing is a disgusting sideshow and will not solve the scandal of tens of thousands (who knows how many?) of illegal immigrants coming to these shores with all of the resulting challenges.
"a portion of the most vulnerable"
So the policy has been sabotaged by the Civil Servants again. Using vague language to undermine it.
And of course Rwanda only agreed to take 1000 initially anyway.
So we need to start the Albania deportation flights ASAP. That returns a significant proportion.
Or just stop worrying about foreigners, stop reading the Daily Mail, or whichever media that's telling you that a small number of immigrants is causing all your problems.
Problem solved.
You mean a ‘large number of illegal unknown immigrants’. Nobody is claiming it’s the cause of all problems. Stop being so disingenuous
I don't get conned by fear mongering media blaming foriegners as a distraction. So I'm not being disingenuous.
But thanks for your concern
But the fear mongering is in your head.
Nope. It's in all the Daily Mail etc and it's in all your threads and posts complaining about foriegners.
You have a strange obsession with a national newspaper and a disingenuous way of exaggerating how things are reported to suit your narrative. I have no problem with ‘foreigners’, that would be odd as there are eight billion of them.
I do have a problem with any mad bad chancers that choose to come to these shores, by illegal means or by bucking the system. As indeed should you. It would be reckless not to, as recent events show.
You appear to be:
A. Suggesting that the Daily Mail doesn't whip up outrage about foriegners.
And
B. Arguing with yourself.
Nothing of the sort. Seek help, or form a higher opinion of the public. They are not as influenced as you by a newspaper.
People are allowed to have and to air a different opinion to you, it’s still allowed to agree to disagree.
You appear to be confused. The only opinion I am offering, is on your posts, and the things you say on here.
I do not need to "seek help". What a ridiculous thing to say."Anyone on here that likes to administer a severe naked spanking with the Mail, dressed as Maggie Thatcher? Could have a gig for you. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Now I understand the view that Rishi doesn't have enough "commitment" to saying in the UK to be PM. I think that is what Seb is seeking to say. However I can't quite work out why he would say such a person isn't British. Nor why this is to do with his heritage. Both are odd turns of phrase. A bit grampa-y. I am going to name 4 different events during the time Boris Johnson was a major political figure 1) the London riots 2) exiting of Afghanistan 3) this summer’s cost of living crisis 4) this 2nd Tory leadership contest He just happened to be on holiday whilst all 4 were taking place… coincidence… But which 1 of the 4 did he actually cut his holiday short for and come back? Interesting when we talk about “commitment to the country” Exactly, does that mean Boris Isn’t British? On your logic, he must be American as he was born there. He is definitely British , however he doesn’t care about the country, he was born in America, his father is a French citizen? Do you think he is British? He’s ‘cuntish’ and that’s one of the few things we will ever agree on. The worst sort of PM ever. A proven liar , a career politician & chancer on the make. Do you think his Dad is French? His dad is French and British , he lives there and has French citizenship . I will ask again, do you think Boris is British ? But he’s clearly not French. Do I think Boris is British? Yes. He is French /British, the French government have granted him citizenship, they know more about the process than you do. So you still think Sunak isn’t British, but Boris is? what is the difference between them ? If you scroll back I have conceded that he is British. Is it wrong to want those running the country to have a vested, personal & historic interest in it? Close & extended family that won’t switch continents at the drop of a hat? Give up on your obsession with skin colour. You are better than that. " Your the one obsessed with immigrants and skin colour, however, it’s good to see that you have admitted to making an error and I apologise if I hadn’t read that earlier | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Now I understand the view that Rishi doesn't have enough "commitment" to saying in the UK to be PM. I think that is what Seb is seeking to say. However I can't quite work out why he would say such a person isn't British. Nor why this is to do with his heritage. Both are odd turns of phrase. A bit grampa-y. I am going to name 4 different events during the time Boris Johnson was a major political figure 1) the London riots 2) exiting of Afghanistan 3) this summer’s cost of living crisis 4) this 2nd Tory leadership contest He just happened to be on holiday whilst all 4 were taking place… coincidence… But which 1 of the 4 did he actually cut his holiday short for and come back? Interesting when we talk about “commitment to the country” Exactly, does that mean Boris Isn’t British? On your logic, he must be American as he was born there. " No, Because as you know boris publicly revoked his US citizenship years ago… but interestingly not till he was just about to become PM! So you could argue he was hedging his bets | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Now I understand the view that Rishi doesn't have enough "commitment" to saying in the UK to be PM. I think that is what Seb is seeking to say. However I can't quite work out why he would say such a person isn't British. Nor why this is to do with his heritage. Both are odd turns of phrase. A bit grampa-y. I am going to name 4 different events during the time Boris Johnson was a major political figure 1) the London riots 2) exiting of Afghanistan 3) this summer’s cost of living crisis 4) this 2nd Tory leadership contest He just happened to be on holiday whilst all 4 were taking place… coincidence… But which 1 of the 4 did he actually cut his holiday short for and come back? Interesting when we talk about “commitment to the country” Exactly, does that mean Boris Isn’t British? On your logic, he must be American as he was born there. No, Because as you know boris publicly revoked his US citizenship years ago… but interestingly not till he was just about to become PM! So you could argue he was hedging his bets "And his heritage and family history is full of ‘nomads’ from across the globe yet his ‘Britishness’ was never in question | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" If not, would you agree it is would stop an asylum seeker from claiming asylum to remain in the UK. Maybe, but it achieves the same aim. Arrive illegally then you are deported unless you claim asylum. If you claim asylum you go to Rwanda, and if your claim is accepted you stay in Rwanda - otherwise deported. You do realise that as part of the deal Rwvada send people back to the UK
Not according to the information I have seen.
I’m afraid it’s true. The whole thing is a disgusting sideshow and will not solve the scandal of tens of thousands (who knows how many?) of illegal immigrants coming to these shores with all of the resulting challenges.
"a portion of the most vulnerable"
So the policy has been sabotaged by the Civil Servants again. Using vague language to undermine it.
And of course Rwanda only agreed to take 1000 initially anyway.
So we need to start the Albania deportation flights ASAP. That returns a significant proportion.
Or just stop worrying about foreigners, stop reading the Daily Mail, or whichever media that's telling you that a small number of immigrants is causing all your problems.
Problem solved.
You mean a ‘large number of illegal unknown immigrants’. Nobody is claiming it’s the cause of all problems. Stop being so disingenuous
I don't get conned by fear mongering media blaming foriegners as a distraction. So I'm not being disingenuous.
But thanks for your concern
But the fear mongering is in your head.
Nope. It's in all the Daily Mail etc and it's in all your threads and posts complaining about foriegners.
You have a strange obsession with a national newspaper and a disingenuous way of exaggerating how things are reported to suit your narrative. I have no problem with ‘foreigners’, that would be odd as there are eight billion of them.
I do have a problem with any mad bad chancers that choose to come to these shores, by illegal means or by bucking the system. As indeed should you. It would be reckless not to, as recent events show.
You appear to be:
A. Suggesting that the Daily Mail doesn't whip up outrage about foriegners.
And
B. Arguing with yourself.
Nothing of the sort. Seek help, or form a higher opinion of the public. They are not as influenced as you by a newspaper.
People are allowed to have and to air a different opinion to you, it’s still allowed to agree to disagree.
You appear to be confused. The only opinion I am offering, is on your posts, and the things you say on here.
I do not need to "seek help". What a ridiculous thing to say.
Anyone on here that likes to administer a severe naked spanking with the Mail, dressed as Maggie Thatcher? Could have a gig for you."What's this got to do with your confusion over nationality and your constant complaining about foriegners, followed up by denying what you just said? Is this related to your low quality personal insults? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" If not, would you agree it is would stop an asylum seeker from claiming asylum to remain in the UK. Maybe, but it achieves the same aim. Arrive illegally then you are deported unless you claim asylum. If you claim asylum you go to Rwanda, and if your claim is accepted you stay in Rwanda - otherwise deported. You do realise that as part of the deal Rwvada send people back to the UK
Not according to the information I have seen.
I’m afraid it’s true. The whole thing is a disgusting sideshow and will not solve the scandal of tens of thousands (who knows how many?) of illegal immigrants coming to these shores with all of the resulting challenges.
"a portion of the most vulnerable"
So the policy has been sabotaged by the Civil Servants again. Using vague language to undermine it.
And of course Rwanda only agreed to take 1000 initially anyway.
So we need to start the Albania deportation flights ASAP. That returns a significant proportion.
Or just stop worrying about foreigners, stop reading the Daily Mail, or whichever media that's telling you that a small number of immigrants is causing all your problems.
Problem solved.
You mean a ‘large number of illegal unknown immigrants’. Nobody is claiming it’s the cause of all problems. Stop being so disingenuous
I don't get conned by fear mongering media blaming foriegners as a distraction. So I'm not being disingenuous.
But thanks for your concern
But the fear mongering is in your head.
Nope. It's in all the Daily Mail etc and it's in all your threads and posts complaining about foriegners.
You have a strange obsession with a national newspaper and a disingenuous way of exaggerating how things are reported to suit your narrative. I have no problem with ‘foreigners’, that would be odd as there are eight billion of them.
I do have a problem with any mad bad chancers that choose to come to these shores, by illegal means or by bucking the system. As indeed should you. It would be reckless not to, as recent events show.
You appear to be:
A. Suggesting that the Daily Mail doesn't whip up outrage about foriegners.
And
B. Arguing with yourself.
Nothing of the sort. Seek help, or form a higher opinion of the public. They are not as influenced as you by a newspaper.
People are allowed to have and to air a different opinion to you, it’s still allowed to agree to disagree.
You appear to be confused. The only opinion I am offering, is on your posts, and the things you say on here.
I do not need to "seek help". What a ridiculous thing to say.
Anyone on here that likes to administer a severe naked spanking with the Mail, dressed as Maggie Thatcher? Could have a gig for you.
What's this got to do with your confusion over nationality and your constant complaining about foriegners, followed up by denying what you just said?
Is this related to your low quality personal insults?"No confusion and no concern with foreigners. Just stifling a yawn though with the tedium of asking to keep it real. Don’t make stuff up. I’ve never denied any comment , but do feel the need to alert others to stuff twisted or taken out of context. I know it suits you to put me down as a rabid racist or a right wing fascist when of course I am nothing of the sort. Quite the opposite in fact. A very open minded liberal with a social conscience and a big heart. In fact, my Tanzanian girlfriend is often complaining that I’m too soft! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" If not, would you agree it is would stop an asylum seeker from claiming asylum to remain in the UK. Maybe, but it achieves the same aim. Arrive illegally then you are deported unless you claim asylum. If you claim asylum you go to Rwanda, and if your claim is accepted you stay in Rwanda - otherwise deported. You do realise that as part of the deal Rwvada send people back to the UK
Not according to the information I have seen.
I’m afraid it’s true. The whole thing is a disgusting sideshow and will not solve the scandal of tens of thousands (who knows how many?) of illegal immigrants coming to these shores with all of the resulting challenges.
"a portion of the most vulnerable"
So the policy has been sabotaged by the Civil Servants again. Using vague language to undermine it.
And of course Rwanda only agreed to take 1000 initially anyway.
So we need to start the Albania deportation flights ASAP. That returns a significant proportion.
Or just stop worrying about foreigners, stop reading the Daily Mail, or whichever media that's telling you that a small number of immigrants is causing all your problems.
Problem solved.
You mean a ‘large number of illegal unknown immigrants’. Nobody is claiming it’s the cause of all problems. Stop being so disingenuous
I don't get conned by fear mongering media blaming foriegners as a distraction. So I'm not being disingenuous.
But thanks for your concern
But the fear mongering is in your head.
Nope. It's in all the Daily Mail etc and it's in all your threads and posts complaining about foriegners.
You have a strange obsession with a national newspaper and a disingenuous way of exaggerating how things are reported to suit your narrative. I have no problem with ‘foreigners’, that would be odd as there are eight billion of them.
I do have a problem with any mad bad chancers that choose to come to these shores, by illegal means or by bucking the system. As indeed should you. It would be reckless not to, as recent events show.
You appear to be:
A. Suggesting that the Daily Mail doesn't whip up outrage about foriegners.
And
B. Arguing with yourself.
Nothing of the sort. Seek help, or form a higher opinion of the public. They are not as influenced as you by a newspaper.
People are allowed to have and to air a different opinion to you, it’s still allowed to agree to disagree.
You appear to be confused. The only opinion I am offering, is on your posts, and the things you say on here.
I do not need to "seek help". What a ridiculous thing to say.
Anyone on here that likes to administer a severe naked spanking with the Mail, dressed as Maggie Thatcher? Could have a gig for you.
What's this got to do with your confusion over nationality and your constant complaining about foriegners, followed up by denying what you just said?
Is this related to your low quality personal insults?
No confusion and no concern with foreigners. Just stifling a yawn though with the tedium of asking to keep it real. Don’t make stuff up. I’ve never denied any comment , but do feel the need to alert others to stuff twisted or taken out of context.
I know it suits you to put me down as a rabid racist or a right wing fascist when of course I am nothing of the sort. Quite the opposite in fact. A very open minded liberal with a social conscience and a big heart. In fact, my Tanzanian girlfriend is often complaining that I’m too soft!"Blimey, if she thinks your obsession with immigrants and foriegners is too soft. Then she must be properly hardcore. Or of course, this could all be bullshit. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" If not, would you agree it is would stop an asylum seeker from claiming asylum to remain in the UK. Maybe, but it achieves the same aim. Arrive illegally then you are deported unless you claim asylum. If you claim asylum you go to Rwanda, and if your claim is accepted you stay in Rwanda - otherwise deported. You do realise that as part of the deal Rwvada send people back to the UK
Not according to the information I have seen.
I’m afraid it’s true. The whole thing is a disgusting sideshow and will not solve the scandal of tens of thousands (who knows how many?) of illegal immigrants coming to these shores with all of the resulting challenges.
"a portion of the most vulnerable"
So the policy has been sabotaged by the Civil Servants again. Using vague language to undermine it.
And of course Rwanda only agreed to take 1000 initially anyway.
So we need to start the Albania deportation flights ASAP. That returns a significant proportion.
Or just stop worrying about foreigners, stop reading the Daily Mail, or whichever media that's telling you that a small number of immigrants is causing all your problems.
Problem solved.
You mean a ‘large number of illegal unknown immigrants’. Nobody is claiming it’s the cause of all problems. Stop being so disingenuous
I don't get conned by fear mongering media blaming foriegners as a distraction. So I'm not being disingenuous.
But thanks for your concern
But the fear mongering is in your head.
Nope. It's in all the Daily Mail etc and it's in all your threads and posts complaining about foriegners.
You have a strange obsession with a national newspaper and a disingenuous way of exaggerating how things are reported to suit your narrative. I have no problem with ‘foreigners’, that would be odd as there are eight billion of them.
I do have a problem with any mad bad chancers that choose to come to these shores, by illegal means or by bucking the system. As indeed should you. It would be reckless not to, as recent events show.
You appear to be:
A. Suggesting that the Daily Mail doesn't whip up outrage about foriegners.
And
B. Arguing with yourself.
Nothing of the sort. Seek help, or form a higher opinion of the public. They are not as influenced as you by a newspaper.
People are allowed to have and to air a different opinion to you, it’s still allowed to agree to disagree.
You appear to be confused. The only opinion I am offering, is on your posts, and the things you say on here.
I do not need to "seek help". What a ridiculous thing to say.
Anyone on here that likes to administer a severe naked spanking with the Mail, dressed as Maggie Thatcher? Could have a gig for you.
What's this got to do with your confusion over nationality and your constant complaining about foriegners, followed up by denying what you just said?
Is this related to your low quality personal insults?
No confusion and no concern with foreigners. Just stifling a yawn though with the tedium of asking to keep it real. Don’t make stuff up. I’ve never denied any comment , but do feel the need to alert others to stuff twisted or taken out of context.
I know it suits you to put me down as a rabid racist or a right wing fascist when of course I am nothing of the sort. Quite the opposite in fact. A very open minded liberal with a social conscience and a big heart. In fact, my Tanzanian girlfriend is often complaining that I’m too soft!
Blimey, if she thinks your obsession with immigrants and foriegners is too soft. Then she must be properly hardcore.
Or of course, this could all be bullshit."Tbf, my imaginary Tanzanian girlfriends thinks Sebs views on immigrants are horrific, | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" If not, would you agree it is would stop an asylum seeker from claiming asylum to remain in the UK. Maybe, but it achieves the same aim. Arrive illegally then you are deported unless you claim asylum. If you claim asylum you go to Rwanda, and if your claim is accepted you stay in Rwanda - otherwise deported. You do realise that as part of the deal Rwvada send people back to the UK
Not according to the information I have seen.
I’m afraid it’s true. The whole thing is a disgusting sideshow and will not solve the scandal of tens of thousands (who knows how many?) of illegal immigrants coming to these shores with all of the resulting challenges.
"a portion of the most vulnerable"
So the policy has been sabotaged by the Civil Servants again. Using vague language to undermine it.
And of course Rwanda only agreed to take 1000 initially anyway.
So we need to start the Albania deportation flights ASAP. That returns a significant proportion.
Or just stop worrying about foreigners, stop reading the Daily Mail, or whichever media that's telling you that a small number of immigrants is causing all your problems.
Problem solved.
You mean a ‘large number of illegal unknown immigrants’. Nobody is claiming it’s the cause of all problems. Stop being so disingenuous
I don't get conned by fear mongering media blaming foriegners as a distraction. So I'm not being disingenuous.
But thanks for your concern
But the fear mongering is in your head.
Nope. It's in all the Daily Mail etc and it's in all your threads and posts complaining about foriegners.
You have a strange obsession with a national newspaper and a disingenuous way of exaggerating how things are reported to suit your narrative. I have no problem with ‘foreigners’, that would be odd as there are eight billion of them.
I do have a problem with any mad bad chancers that choose to come to these shores, by illegal means or by bucking the system. As indeed should you. It would be reckless not to, as recent events show.
You appear to be:
A. Suggesting that the Daily Mail doesn't whip up outrage about foriegners.
And
B. Arguing with yourself.
Nothing of the sort. Seek help, or form a higher opinion of the public. They are not as influenced as you by a newspaper.
People are allowed to have and to air a different opinion to you, it’s still allowed to agree to disagree.
You appear to be confused. The only opinion I am offering, is on your posts, and the things you say on here.
I do not need to "seek help". What a ridiculous thing to say.
Anyone on here that likes to administer a severe naked spanking with the Mail, dressed as Maggie Thatcher? Could have a gig for you.
What's this got to do with your confusion over nationality and your constant complaining about foriegners, followed up by denying what you just said?
Is this related to your low quality personal insults?
No confusion and no concern with foreigners. Just stifling a yawn though with the tedium of asking to keep it real. Don’t make stuff up. I’ve never denied any comment , but do feel the need to alert others to stuff twisted or taken out of context.
I know it suits you to put me down as a rabid racist or a right wing fascist when of course I am nothing of the sort. Quite the opposite in fact. A very open minded liberal with a social conscience and a big heart. In fact, my Tanzanian girlfriend is often complaining that I’m too soft!"Is she into swinging? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" If not, would you agree it is would stop an asylum seeker from claiming asylum to remain in the UK. Maybe, but it achieves the same aim. Arrive illegally then you are deported unless you claim asylum. If you claim asylum you go to Rwanda, and if your claim is accepted you stay in Rwanda - otherwise deported. You do realise that as part of the deal Rwvada send people back to the UK
Not according to the information I have seen.
I’m afraid it’s true. The whole thing is a disgusting sideshow and will not solve the scandal of tens of thousands (who knows how many?) of illegal immigrants coming to these shores with all of the resulting challenges.
"a portion of the most vulnerable"
So the policy has been sabotaged by the Civil Servants again. Using vague language to undermine it.
And of course Rwanda only agreed to take 1000 initially anyway.
So we need to start the Albania deportation flights ASAP. That returns a significant proportion.
Or just stop worrying about foreigners, stop reading the Daily Mail, or whichever media that's telling you that a small number of immigrants is causing all your problems.
Problem solved.
You mean a ‘large number of illegal unknown immigrants’. Nobody is claiming it’s the cause of all problems. Stop being so disingenuous
I don't get conned by fear mongering media blaming foriegners as a distraction. So I'm not being disingenuous.
But thanks for your concern
But the fear mongering is in your head.
Nope. It's in all the Daily Mail etc and it's in all your threads and posts complaining about foriegners.
You have a strange obsession with a national newspaper and a disingenuous way of exaggerating how things are reported to suit your narrative. I have no problem with ‘foreigners’, that would be odd as there are eight billion of them.
I do have a problem with any mad bad chancers that choose to come to these shores, by illegal means or by bucking the system. As indeed should you. It would be reckless not to, as recent events show.
You appear to be:
A. Suggesting that the Daily Mail doesn't whip up outrage about foriegners.
And
B. Arguing with yourself.
Nothing of the sort. Seek help, or form a higher opinion of the public. They are not as influenced as you by a newspaper.
People are allowed to have and to air a different opinion to you, it’s still allowed to agree to disagree.
You appear to be confused. The only opinion I am offering, is on your posts, and the things you say on here.
I do not need to "seek help". What a ridiculous thing to say.
Anyone on here that likes to administer a severe naked spanking with the Mail, dressed as Maggie Thatcher? Could have a gig for you.
What's this got to do with your confusion over nationality and your constant complaining about foriegners, followed up by denying what you just said?
Is this related to your low quality personal insults?
No confusion and no concern with foreigners. Just stifling a yawn though with the tedium of asking to keep it real. Don’t make stuff up. I’ve never denied any comment , but do feel the need to alert others to stuff twisted or taken out of context.
I know it suits you to put me down as a rabid racist or a right wing fascist when of course I am nothing of the sort. Quite the opposite in fact. A very open minded liberal with a social conscience and a big heart. In fact, my Tanzanian girlfriend is often complaining that I’m too soft!
Is she into swinging? "No. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" If not, would you agree it is would stop an asylum seeker from claiming asylum to remain in the UK. Maybe, but it achieves the same aim. Arrive illegally then you are deported unless you claim asylum. If you claim asylum you go to Rwanda, and if your claim is accepted you stay in Rwanda - otherwise deported. You do realise that as part of the deal Rwvada send people back to the UK
Not according to the information I have seen.
I’m afraid it’s true. The whole thing is a disgusting sideshow and will not solve the scandal of tens of thousands (who knows how many?) of illegal immigrants coming to these shores with all of the resulting challenges.
"a portion of the most vulnerable"
So the policy has been sabotaged by the Civil Servants again. Using vague language to undermine it.
And of course Rwanda only agreed to take 1000 initially anyway.
So we need to start the Albania deportation flights ASAP. That returns a significant proportion.
Or just stop worrying about foreigners, stop reading the Daily Mail, or whichever media that's telling you that a small number of immigrants is causing all your problems.
Problem solved.
You mean a ‘large number of illegal unknown immigrants’. Nobody is claiming it’s the cause of all problems. Stop being so disingenuous
I don't get conned by fear mongering media blaming foriegners as a distraction. So I'm not being disingenuous.
But thanks for your concern
But the fear mongering is in your head.
Nope. It's in all the Daily Mail etc and it's in all your threads and posts complaining about foriegners.
You have a strange obsession with a national newspaper and a disingenuous way of exaggerating how things are reported to suit your narrative. I have no problem with ‘foreigners’, that would be odd as there are eight billion of them.
I do have a problem with any mad bad chancers that choose to come to these shores, by illegal means or by bucking the system. As indeed should you. It would be reckless not to, as recent events show.
You appear to be:
A. Suggesting that the Daily Mail doesn't whip up outrage about foriegners.
And
B. Arguing with yourself.
Nothing of the sort. Seek help, or form a higher opinion of the public. They are not as influenced as you by a newspaper.
People are allowed to have and to air a different opinion to you, it’s still allowed to agree to disagree.
You appear to be confused. The only opinion I am offering, is on your posts, and the things you say on here.
I do not need to "seek help". What a ridiculous thing to say.
Anyone on here that likes to administer a severe naked spanking with the Mail, dressed as Maggie Thatcher? Could have a gig for you.
What's this got to do with your confusion over nationality and your constant complaining about foriegners, followed up by denying what you just said?
Is this related to your low quality personal insults?
No confusion and no concern with foreigners. Just stifling a yawn though with the tedium of asking to keep it real. Don’t make stuff up. I’ve never denied any comment , but do feel the need to alert others to stuff twisted or taken out of context.
I know it suits you to put me down as a rabid racist or a right wing fascist when of course I am nothing of the sort. Quite the opposite in fact. A very open minded liberal with a social conscience and a big heart. In fact, my Tanzanian girlfriend is often complaining that I’m too soft!
Blimey, if she thinks your obsession with immigrants and foriegners is too soft. Then she must be properly hardcore.
Or of course, this could all be bullshit.
Tbf, my imaginary Tanzanian girlfriends thinks Sebs views on immigrants are horrific, "Then try a real one. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" If not, would you agree it is would stop an asylum seeker from claiming asylum to remain in the UK. Maybe, but it achieves the same aim. Arrive illegally then you are deported unless you claim asylum. If you claim asylum you go to Rwanda, and if your claim is accepted you stay in Rwanda - otherwise deported. You do realise that as part of the deal Rwvada send people back to the UK
Not according to the information I have seen.
I’m afraid it’s true. The whole thing is a disgusting sideshow and will not solve the scandal of tens of thousands (who knows how many?) of illegal immigrants coming to these shores with all of the resulting challenges.
"a portion of the most vulnerable"
So the policy has been sabotaged by the Civil Servants again. Using vague language to undermine it.
And of course Rwanda only agreed to take 1000 initially anyway.
So we need to start the Albania deportation flights ASAP. That returns a significant proportion.
Or just stop worrying about foreigners, stop reading the Daily Mail, or whichever media that's telling you that a small number of immigrants is causing all your problems.
Problem solved.
You mean a ‘large number of illegal unknown immigrants’. Nobody is claiming it’s the cause of all problems. Stop being so disingenuous
I don't get conned by fear mongering media blaming foriegners as a distraction. So I'm not being disingenuous.
But thanks for your concern
But the fear mongering is in your head.
Nope. It's in all the Daily Mail etc and it's in all your threads and posts complaining about foriegners.
You have a strange obsession with a national newspaper and a disingenuous way of exaggerating how things are reported to suit your narrative. I have no problem with ‘foreigners’, that would be odd as there are eight billion of them.
I do have a problem with any mad bad chancers that choose to come to these shores, by illegal means or by bucking the system. As indeed should you. It would be reckless not to, as recent events show.
You appear to be:
A. Suggesting that the Daily Mail doesn't whip up outrage about foriegners.
And
B. Arguing with yourself.
Nothing of the sort. Seek help, or form a higher opinion of the public. They are not as influenced as you by a newspaper.
People are allowed to have and to air a different opinion to you, it’s still allowed to agree to disagree.
You appear to be confused. The only opinion I am offering, is on your posts, and the things you say on here.
I do not need to "seek help". What a ridiculous thing to say.
Anyone on here that likes to administer a severe naked spanking with the Mail, dressed as Maggie Thatcher? Could have a gig for you.
What's this got to do with your confusion over nationality and your constant complaining about foriegners, followed up by denying what you just said?
Is this related to your low quality personal insults?
No confusion and no concern with foreigners. Just stifling a yawn though with the tedium of asking to keep it real. Don’t make stuff up. I’ve never denied any comment , but do feel the need to alert others to stuff twisted or taken out of context.
I know it suits you to put me down as a rabid racist or a right wing fascist when of course I am nothing of the sort. Quite the opposite in fact. A very open minded liberal with a social conscience and a big heart. In fact, my Tanzanian girlfriend is often complaining that I’m too soft!
Blimey, if she thinks your obsession with immigrants and foriegners is too soft. Then she must be properly hardcore.
Or of course, this could all be bullshit.
Tbf, my imaginary Tanzanian girlfriends thinks Sebs views on immigrants are horrific, Then try a real one. "She is just as ‘real’ as yours | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" If not, would you agree it is would stop an asylum seeker from claiming asylum to remain in the UK. Maybe, but it achieves the same aim. Arrive illegally then you are deported unless you claim asylum. If you claim asylum you go to Rwanda, and if your claim is accepted you stay in Rwanda - otherwise deported. You do realise that as part of the deal Rwvada send people back to the UK
Not according to the information I have seen.
I’m afraid it’s true. The whole thing is a disgusting sideshow and will not solve the scandal of tens of thousands (who knows how many?) of illegal immigrants coming to these shores with all of the resulting challenges.
"a portion of the most vulnerable"
So the policy has been sabotaged by the Civil Servants again. Using vague language to undermine it.
And of course Rwanda only agreed to take 1000 initially anyway.
So we need to start the Albania deportation flights ASAP. That returns a significant proportion.
Or just stop worrying about foreigners, stop reading the Daily Mail, or whichever media that's telling you that a small number of immigrants is causing all your problems.
Problem solved.
You mean a ‘large number of illegal unknown immigrants’. Nobody is claiming it’s the cause of all problems. Stop being so disingenuous
I don't get conned by fear mongering media blaming foriegners as a distraction. So I'm not being disingenuous.
But thanks for your concern
But the fear mongering is in your head.
Nope. It's in all the Daily Mail etc and it's in all your threads and posts complaining about foriegners.
You have a strange obsession with a national newspaper and a disingenuous way of exaggerating how things are reported to suit your narrative. I have no problem with ‘foreigners’, that would be odd as there are eight billion of them.
I do have a problem with any mad bad chancers that choose to come to these shores, by illegal means or by bucking the system. As indeed should you. It would be reckless not to, as recent events show.
You appear to be:
A. Suggesting that the Daily Mail doesn't whip up outrage about foriegners.
And
B. Arguing with yourself.
Nothing of the sort. Seek help, or form a higher opinion of the public. They are not as influenced as you by a newspaper.
People are allowed to have and to air a different opinion to you, it’s still allowed to agree to disagree.
You appear to be confused. The only opinion I am offering, is on your posts, and the things you say on here.
I do not need to "seek help". What a ridiculous thing to say.
Anyone on here that likes to administer a severe naked spanking with the Mail, dressed as Maggie Thatcher? Could have a gig for you.
What's this got to do with your confusion over nationality and your constant complaining about foriegners, followed up by denying what you just said?
Is this related to your low quality personal insults?
No confusion and no concern with foreigners. Just stifling a yawn though with the tedium of asking to keep it real. Don’t make stuff up. I’ve never denied any comment , but do feel the need to alert others to stuff twisted or taken out of context.
I know it suits you to put me down as a rabid racist or a right wing fascist when of course I am nothing of the sort. Quite the opposite in fact. A very open minded liberal with a social conscience and a big heart. In fact, my Tanzanian girlfriend is often complaining that I’m too soft!
Blimey, if she thinks your obsession with immigrants and foriegners is too soft. Then she must be properly hardcore.
Or of course, this could all be bullshit."Actually, most people from abroad that I talk to have a fairly hardline on open or illegal immigration compared to me. An Estonian woman that’s lived here for 20 years, married to an old colleague and friend voted for Brexit can you believe? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" If not, would you agree it is would stop an asylum seeker from claiming asylum to remain in the UK. Maybe, but it achieves the same aim. Arrive illegally then you are deported unless you claim asylum. If you claim asylum you go to Rwanda, and if your claim is accepted you stay in Rwanda - otherwise deported. You do realise that as part of the deal Rwvada send people back to the UK
Not according to the information I have seen.
I’m afraid it’s true. The whole thing is a disgusting sideshow and will not solve the scandal of tens of thousands (who knows how many?) of illegal immigrants coming to these shores with all of the resulting challenges.
"a portion of the most vulnerable"
So the policy has been sabotaged by the Civil Servants again. Using vague language to undermine it.
And of course Rwanda only agreed to take 1000 initially anyway.
So we need to start the Albania deportation flights ASAP. That returns a significant proportion.
Or just stop worrying about foreigners, stop reading the Daily Mail, or whichever media that's telling you that a small number of immigrants is causing all your problems.
Problem solved.
You mean a ‘large number of illegal unknown immigrants’. Nobody is claiming it’s the cause of all problems. Stop being so disingenuous
I don't get conned by fear mongering media blaming foriegners as a distraction. So I'm not being disingenuous.
But thanks for your concern
But the fear mongering is in your head.
Nope. It's in all the Daily Mail etc and it's in all your threads and posts complaining about foriegners.
You have a strange obsession with a national newspaper and a disingenuous way of exaggerating how things are reported to suit your narrative. I have no problem with ‘foreigners’, that would be odd as there are eight billion of them.
I do have a problem with any mad bad chancers that choose to come to these shores, by illegal means or by bucking the system. As indeed should you. It would be reckless not to, as recent events show.
You appear to be:
A. Suggesting that the Daily Mail doesn't whip up outrage about foriegners.
And
B. Arguing with yourself.
Nothing of the sort. Seek help, or form a higher opinion of the public. They are not as influenced as you by a newspaper.
People are allowed to have and to air a different opinion to you, it’s still allowed to agree to disagree.
You appear to be confused. The only opinion I am offering, is on your posts, and the things you say on here.
I do not need to "seek help". What a ridiculous thing to say.
Anyone on here that likes to administer a severe naked spanking with the Mail, dressed as Maggie Thatcher? Could have a gig for you.
What's this got to do with your confusion over nationality and your constant complaining about foriegners, followed up by denying what you just said?
Is this related to your low quality personal insults?
No confusion and no concern with foreigners. Just stifling a yawn though with the tedium of asking to keep it real. Don’t make stuff up. I’ve never denied any comment , but do feel the need to alert others to stuff twisted or taken out of context.
I know it suits you to put me down as a rabid racist or a right wing fascist when of course I am nothing of the sort. Quite the opposite in fact. A very open minded liberal with a social conscience and a big heart. In fact, my Tanzanian girlfriend is often complaining that I’m too soft!
Blimey, if she thinks your obsession with immigrants and foriegners is too soft. Then she must be properly hardcore.
Or of course, this could all be bullshit.
Tbf, my imaginary Tanzanian girlfriends thinks Sebs views on immigrants are horrific, Then try a real one.
She is just as ‘real’ as yours "Excellent | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" If not, would you agree it is would stop an asylum seeker from claiming asylum to remain in the UK. Maybe, but it achieves the same aim. Arrive illegally then you are deported unless you claim asylum. If you claim asylum you go to Rwanda, and if your claim is accepted you stay in Rwanda - otherwise deported. You do realise that as part of the deal Rwvada send people back to the UK
Not according to the information I have seen.
I’m afraid it’s true. The whole thing is a disgusting sideshow and will not solve the scandal of tens of thousands (who knows how many?) of illegal immigrants coming to these shores with all of the resulting challenges.
"a portion of the most vulnerable"
So the policy has been sabotaged by the Civil Servants again. Using vague language to undermine it.
And of course Rwanda only agreed to take 1000 initially anyway.
So we need to start the Albania deportation flights ASAP. That returns a significant proportion.
Or just stop worrying about foreigners, stop reading the Daily Mail, or whichever media that's telling you that a small number of immigrants is causing all your problems.
Problem solved.
You mean a ‘large number of illegal unknown immigrants’. Nobody is claiming it’s the cause of all problems. Stop being so disingenuous
I don't get conned by fear mongering media blaming foriegners as a distraction. So I'm not being disingenuous.
But thanks for your concern
But the fear mongering is in your head.
Nope. It's in all the Daily Mail etc and it's in all your threads and posts complaining about foriegners.
You have a strange obsession with a national newspaper and a disingenuous way of exaggerating how things are reported to suit your narrative. I have no problem with ‘foreigners’, that would be odd as there are eight billion of them.
I do have a problem with any mad bad chancers that choose to come to these shores, by illegal means or by bucking the system. As indeed should you. It would be reckless not to, as recent events show.
You appear to be:
A. Suggesting that the Daily Mail doesn't whip up outrage about foriegners.
And
B. Arguing with yourself.
Nothing of the sort. Seek help, or form a higher opinion of the public. They are not as influenced as you by a newspaper.
People are allowed to have and to air a different opinion to you, it’s still allowed to agree to disagree.
You appear to be confused. The only opinion I am offering, is on your posts, and the things you say on here.
I do not need to "seek help". What a ridiculous thing to say.
Anyone on here that likes to administer a severe naked spanking with the Mail, dressed as Maggie Thatcher? Could have a gig for you.
What's this got to do with your confusion over nationality and your constant complaining about foriegners, followed up by denying what you just said?
Is this related to your low quality personal insults?
No confusion and no concern with foreigners. Just stifling a yawn though with the tedium of asking to keep it real. Don’t make stuff up. I’ve never denied any comment , but do feel the need to alert others to stuff twisted or taken out of context.
I know it suits you to put me down as a rabid racist or a right wing fascist when of course I am nothing of the sort. Quite the opposite in fact. A very open minded liberal with a social conscience and a big heart. In fact, my Tanzanian girlfriend is often complaining that I’m too soft!
Blimey, if she thinks your obsession with immigrants and foriegners is too soft. Then she must be properly hardcore.
Or of course, this could all be bullshit.
Actually, most people from abroad that I talk to have a fairly hardline on open or illegal immigration compared to me. An Estonian woman that’s lived here for 20 years, married to an old colleague and friend voted for Brexit can you believe? "Yes. Now you're getting it! Judge people on their character, not on their nationality. It feels like we've had a breakthrough. Maybe this will be the end of your lazy foreigner bashing rhetoric. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" If not, would you agree it is would stop an asylum seeker from claiming asylum to remain in the UK. Maybe, but it achieves the same aim. Arrive illegally then you are deported unless you claim asylum. If you claim asylum you go to Rwanda, and if your claim is accepted you stay in Rwanda - otherwise deported. You do realise that as part of the deal Rwvada send people back to the UK
Not according to the information I have seen.
I’m afraid it’s true. The whole thing is a disgusting sideshow and will not solve the scandal of tens of thousands (who knows how many?) of illegal immigrants coming to these shores with all of the resulting challenges.
"a portion of the most vulnerable"
So the policy has been sabotaged by the Civil Servants again. Using vague language to undermine it.
And of course Rwanda only agreed to take 1000 initially anyway.
So we need to start the Albania deportation flights ASAP. That returns a significant proportion.
Or just stop worrying about foreigners, stop reading the Daily Mail, or whichever media that's telling you that a small number of immigrants is causing all your problems.
Problem solved.
You mean a ‘large number of illegal unknown immigrants’. Nobody is claiming it’s the cause of all problems. Stop being so disingenuous
I don't get conned by fear mongering media blaming foriegners as a distraction. So I'm not being disingenuous.
But thanks for your concern
But the fear mongering is in your head.
Nope. It's in all the Daily Mail etc and it's in all your threads and posts complaining about foriegners.
You have a strange obsession with a national newspaper and a disingenuous way of exaggerating how things are reported to suit your narrative. I have no problem with ‘foreigners’, that would be odd as there are eight billion of them.
I do have a problem with any mad bad chancers that choose to come to these shores, by illegal means or by bucking the system. As indeed should you. It would be reckless not to, as recent events show.
You appear to be:
A. Suggesting that the Daily Mail doesn't whip up outrage about foriegners.
And
B. Arguing with yourself.
Nothing of the sort. Seek help, or form a higher opinion of the public. They are not as influenced as you by a newspaper.
People are allowed to have and to air a different opinion to you, it’s still allowed to agree to disagree.
You appear to be confused. The only opinion I am offering, is on your posts, and the things you say on here.
I do not need to "seek help". What a ridiculous thing to say.
Anyone on here that likes to administer a severe naked spanking with the Mail, dressed as Maggie Thatcher? Could have a gig for you.
What's this got to do with your confusion over nationality and your constant complaining about foriegners, followed up by denying what you just said?
Is this related to your low quality personal insults?
No confusion and no concern with foreigners. Just stifling a yawn though with the tedium of asking to keep it real. Don’t make stuff up. I’ve never denied any comment , but do feel the need to alert others to stuff twisted or taken out of context.
I know it suits you to put me down as a rabid racist or a right wing fascist when of course I am nothing of the sort. Quite the opposite in fact. A very open minded liberal with a social conscience and a big heart. In fact, my Tanzanian girlfriend is often complaining that I’m too soft!
Blimey, if she thinks your obsession with immigrants and foriegners is too soft. Then she must be properly hardcore.
Or of course, this could all be bullshit.
Actually, most people from abroad that I talk to have a fairly hardline on open or illegal immigration compared to me. An Estonian woman that’s lived here for 20 years, married to an old colleague and friend voted for Brexit can you believe? "That’s amazing because most people from abroad I talk to are fairly tolerant on open or illegal immigration compared to you . An Albanian woman that’s my lived here for 25 years, married to an old colleague and friend voted to remain in the EU, understandable | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" If not, would you agree it is would stop an asylum seeker from claiming asylum to remain in the UK. Maybe, but it achieves the same aim. Arrive illegally then you are deported unless you claim asylum. If you claim asylum you go to Rwanda, and if your claim is accepted you stay in Rwanda - otherwise deported. You do realise that as part of the deal Rwvada send people back to the UK
Not according to the information I have seen.
I’m afraid it’s true. The whole thing is a disgusting sideshow and will not solve the scandal of tens of thousands (who knows how many?) of illegal immigrants coming to these shores with all of the resulting challenges.
"a portion of the most vulnerable"
So the policy has been sabotaged by the Civil Servants again. Using vague language to undermine it.
And of course Rwanda only agreed to take 1000 initially anyway.
So we need to start the Albania deportation flights ASAP. That returns a significant proportion.
Or just stop worrying about foreigners, stop reading the Daily Mail, or whichever media that's telling you that a small number of immigrants is causing all your problems.
Problem solved.
You mean a ‘large number of illegal unknown immigrants’. Nobody is claiming it’s the cause of all problems. Stop being so disingenuous
I don't get conned by fear mongering media blaming foriegners as a distraction. So I'm not being disingenuous.
But thanks for your concern
But the fear mongering is in your head.
Nope. It's in all the Daily Mail etc and it's in all your threads and posts complaining about foriegners.
You have a strange obsession with a national newspaper and a disingenuous way of exaggerating how things are reported to suit your narrative. I have no problem with ‘foreigners’, that would be odd as there are eight billion of them.
I do have a problem with any mad bad chancers that choose to come to these shores, by illegal means or by bucking the system. As indeed should you. It would be reckless not to, as recent events show.
You appear to be:
A. Suggesting that the Daily Mail doesn't whip up outrage about foriegners.
And
B. Arguing with yourself.
Nothing of the sort. Seek help, or form a higher opinion of the public. They are not as influenced as you by a newspaper.
People are allowed to have and to air a different opinion to you, it’s still allowed to agree to disagree.
You appear to be confused. The only opinion I am offering, is on your posts, and the things you say on here.
I do not need to "seek help". What a ridiculous thing to say.
Anyone on here that likes to administer a severe naked spanking with the Mail, dressed as Maggie Thatcher? Could have a gig for you.
What's this got to do with your confusion over nationality and your constant complaining about foriegners, followed up by denying what you just said?
Is this related to your low quality personal insults?
No confusion and no concern with foreigners. Just stifling a yawn though with the tedium of asking to keep it real. Don’t make stuff up. I’ve never denied any comment , but do feel the need to alert others to stuff twisted or taken out of context.
I know it suits you to put me down as a rabid racist or a right wing fascist when of course I am nothing of the sort. Quite the opposite in fact. A very open minded liberal with a social conscience and a big heart. In fact, my Tanzanian girlfriend is often complaining that I’m too soft!
Blimey, if she thinks your obsession with immigrants and foriegners is too soft. Then she must be properly hardcore.
Or of course, this could all be bullshit.
Actually, most people from abroad that I talk to have a fairly hardline on open or illegal immigration compared to me. An Estonian woman that’s lived here for 20 years, married to an old colleague and friend voted for Brexit can you believe?
Yes. Now you're getting it! Judge people on their character, not on their nationality.
It feels like we've had a breakthrough. Maybe this will be the end of your lazy foreigner bashing rhetoric. "Once again for clarity - I never have and never will judge anyone on their nationality. Or for that matter posted any lazy rhetoric. As I said , although clearly this doesn’t apply to the Fab forum, people can have different views, and it’s ok to agree to disagree. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" If not, would you agree it is would stop an asylum seeker from claiming asylum to remain in the UK. Maybe, but it achieves the same aim. Arrive illegally then you are deported unless you claim asylum. If you claim asylum you go to Rwanda, and if your claim is accepted you stay in Rwanda - otherwise deported. You do realise that as part of the deal Rwvada send people back to the UK
Not according to the information I have seen.
I’m afraid it’s true. The whole thing is a disgusting sideshow and will not solve the scandal of tens of thousands (who knows how many?) of illegal immigrants coming to these shores with all of the resulting challenges.
"a portion of the most vulnerable"
So the policy has been sabotaged by the Civil Servants again. Using vague language to undermine it.
And of course Rwanda only agreed to take 1000 initially anyway.
So we need to start the Albania deportation flights ASAP. That returns a significant proportion.
Or just stop worrying about foreigners, stop reading the Daily Mail, or whichever media that's telling you that a small number of immigrants is causing all your problems.
Problem solved.
You mean a ‘large number of illegal unknown immigrants’. Nobody is claiming it’s the cause of all problems. Stop being so disingenuous
I don't get conned by fear mongering media blaming foriegners as a distraction. So I'm not being disingenuous.
But thanks for your concern
But the fear mongering is in your head.
Nope. It's in all the Daily Mail etc and it's in all your threads and posts complaining about foriegners.
You have a strange obsession with a national newspaper and a disingenuous way of exaggerating how things are reported to suit your narrative. I have no problem with ‘foreigners’, that would be odd as there are eight billion of them.
I do have a problem with any mad bad chancers that choose to come to these shores, by illegal means or by bucking the system. As indeed should you. It would be reckless not to, as recent events show.
You appear to be:
A. Suggesting that the Daily Mail doesn't whip up outrage about foriegners.
And
B. Arguing with yourself.
Nothing of the sort. Seek help, or form a higher opinion of the public. They are not as influenced as you by a newspaper.
People are allowed to have and to air a different opinion to you, it’s still allowed to agree to disagree.
You appear to be confused. The only opinion I am offering, is on your posts, and the things you say on here.
I do not need to "seek help". What a ridiculous thing to say.
Anyone on here that likes to administer a severe naked spanking with the Mail, dressed as Maggie Thatcher? Could have a gig for you.
What's this got to do with your confusion over nationality and your constant complaining about foriegners, followed up by denying what you just said?
Is this related to your low quality personal insults?
No confusion and no concern with foreigners. Just stifling a yawn though with the tedium of asking to keep it real. Don’t make stuff up. I’ve never denied any comment , but do feel the need to alert others to stuff twisted or taken out of context.
I know it suits you to put me down as a rabid racist or a right wing fascist when of course I am nothing of the sort. Quite the opposite in fact. A very open minded liberal with a social conscience and a big heart. In fact, my Tanzanian girlfriend is often complaining that I’m too soft!
Blimey, if she thinks your obsession with immigrants and foriegners is too soft. Then she must be properly hardcore.
Or of course, this could all be bullshit.
Actually, most people from abroad that I talk to have a fairly hardline on open or illegal immigration compared to me. An Estonian woman that’s lived here for 20 years, married to an old colleague and friend voted for Brexit can you believe?
Yes. Now you're getting it! Judge people on their character, not on their nationality.
It feels like we've had a breakthrough. Maybe this will be the end of your lazy foreigner bashing rhetoric.
Once again for clarity - I never have and never will judge anyone on their nationality. Or for that matter posted any lazy rhetoric. As I said , although clearly this doesn’t apply to the Fab forum, people can have different views, and it’s ok to agree to disagree. "The green arrow tells a different story. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" If not, would you agree it is would stop an asylum seeker from claiming asylum to remain in the UK. Maybe, but it achieves the same aim. Arrive illegally then you are deported unless you claim asylum. If you claim asylum you go to Rwanda, and if your claim is accepted you stay in Rwanda - otherwise deported. You do realise that as part of the deal Rwvada send people back to the UK
Not according to the information I have seen.
I’m afraid it’s true. The whole thing is a disgusting sideshow and will not solve the scandal of tens of thousands (who knows how many?) of illegal immigrants coming to these shores with all of the resulting challenges.
"a portion of the most vulnerable"
So the policy has been sabotaged by the Civil Servants again. Using vague language to undermine it.
And of course Rwanda only agreed to take 1000 initially anyway.
So we need to start the Albania deportation flights ASAP. That returns a significant proportion.
Or just stop worrying about foreigners, stop reading the Daily Mail, or whichever media that's telling you that a small number of immigrants is causing all your problems.
Problem solved.
You mean a ‘large number of illegal unknown immigrants’. Nobody is claiming it’s the cause of all problems. Stop being so disingenuous
I don't get conned by fear mongering media blaming foriegners as a distraction. So I'm not being disingenuous.
But thanks for your concern
But the fear mongering is in your head.
Nope. It's in all the Daily Mail etc and it's in all your threads and posts complaining about foriegners.
You have a strange obsession with a national newspaper and a disingenuous way of exaggerating how things are reported to suit your narrative. I have no problem with ‘foreigners’, that would be odd as there are eight billion of them.
I do have a problem with any mad bad chancers that choose to come to these shores, by illegal means or by bucking the system. As indeed should you. It would be reckless not to, as recent events show.
You appear to be:
A. Suggesting that the Daily Mail doesn't whip up outrage about foriegners.
And
B. Arguing with yourself.
Nothing of the sort. Seek help, or form a higher opinion of the public. They are not as influenced as you by a newspaper.
People are allowed to have and to air a different opinion to you, it’s still allowed to agree to disagree.
You appear to be confused. The only opinion I am offering, is on your posts, and the things you say on here.
I do not need to "seek help". What a ridiculous thing to say.
Anyone on here that likes to administer a severe naked spanking with the Mail, dressed as Maggie Thatcher? Could have a gig for you.
What's this got to do with your confusion over nationality and your constant complaining about foriegners, followed up by denying what you just said?
Is this related to your low quality personal insults?
No confusion and no concern with foreigners. Just stifling a yawn though with the tedium of asking to keep it real. Don’t make stuff up. I’ve never denied any comment , but do feel the need to alert others to stuff twisted or taken out of context.
I know it suits you to put me down as a rabid racist or a right wing fascist when of course I am nothing of the sort. Quite the opposite in fact. A very open minded liberal with a social conscience and a big heart. In fact, my Tanzanian girlfriend is often complaining that I’m too soft!
Blimey, if she thinks your obsession with immigrants and foriegners is too soft. Then she must be properly hardcore.
Or of course, this could all be bullshit.
Actually, most people from abroad that I talk to have a fairly hardline on open or illegal immigration compared to me. An Estonian woman that’s lived here for 20 years, married to an old colleague and friend voted for Brexit can you believe?
Yes. Now you're getting it! Judge people on their character, not on their nationality.
It feels like we've had a breakthrough. Maybe this will be the end of your lazy foreigner bashing rhetoric.
Once again for clarity - I never have and never will judge anyone on their nationality. Or for that matter posted any lazy rhetoric. As I said , although clearly this doesn’t apply to the Fab forum, people can have different views, and it’s ok to agree to disagree. "When you were trying to suggest that Rishi Sunsk wasn’t British you stated ‘Jesus Christ was born in a stables, that doesn’t make him a horse’ , that is lazy rhetoric | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" If not, would you agree it is would stop an asylum seeker from claiming asylum to remain in the UK. Maybe, but it achieves the same aim. Arrive illegally then you are deported unless you claim asylum. If you claim asylum you go to Rwanda, and if your claim is accepted you stay in Rwanda - otherwise deported. You do realise that as part of the deal Rwvada send people back to the UK
Not according to the information I have seen.
I’m afraid it’s true. The whole thing is a disgusting sideshow and will not solve the scandal of tens of thousands (who knows how many?) of illegal immigrants coming to these shores with all of the resulting challenges.
"a portion of the most vulnerable"
So the policy has been sabotaged by the Civil Servants again. Using vague language to undermine it.
And of course Rwanda only agreed to take 1000 initially anyway.
So we need to start the Albania deportation flights ASAP. That returns a significant proportion.
Or just stop worrying about foreigners, stop reading the Daily Mail, or whichever media that's telling you that a small number of immigrants is causing all your problems.
Problem solved.
You mean a ‘large number of illegal unknown immigrants’. Nobody is claiming it’s the cause of all problems. Stop being so disingenuous
I don't get conned by fear mongering media blaming foriegners as a distraction. So I'm not being disingenuous.
But thanks for your concern
But the fear mongering is in your head.
Nope. It's in all the Daily Mail etc and it's in all your threads and posts complaining about foriegners.
You have a strange obsession with a national newspaper and a disingenuous way of exaggerating how things are reported to suit your narrative. I have no problem with ‘foreigners’, that would be odd as there are eight billion of them.
I do have a problem with any mad bad chancers that choose to come to these shores, by illegal means or by bucking the system. As indeed should you. It would be reckless not to, as recent events show.
You appear to be:
A. Suggesting that the Daily Mail doesn't whip up outrage about foriegners.
And
B. Arguing with yourself.
Nothing of the sort. Seek help, or form a higher opinion of the public. They are not as influenced as you by a newspaper.
People are allowed to have and to air a different opinion to you, it’s still allowed to agree to disagree.
You appear to be confused. The only opinion I am offering, is on your posts, and the things you say on here.
I do not need to "seek help". What a ridiculous thing to say.
Anyone on here that likes to administer a severe naked spanking with the Mail, dressed as Maggie Thatcher? Could have a gig for you.
What's this got to do with your confusion over nationality and your constant complaining about foriegners, followed up by denying what you just said?
Is this related to your low quality personal insults?
No confusion and no concern with foreigners. Just stifling a yawn though with the tedium of asking to keep it real. Don’t make stuff up. I’ve never denied any comment , but do feel the need to alert others to stuff twisted or taken out of context.
I know it suits you to put me down as a rabid racist or a right wing fascist when of course I am nothing of the sort. Quite the opposite in fact. A very open minded liberal with a social conscience and a big heart. In fact, my Tanzanian girlfriend is often complaining that I’m too soft!
Blimey, if she thinks your obsession with immigrants and foriegners is too soft. Then she must be properly hardcore.
Or of course, this could all be bullshit.
Actually, most people from abroad that I talk to have a fairly hardline on open or illegal immigration compared to me. An Estonian woman that’s lived here for 20 years, married to an old colleague and friend voted for Brexit can you believe? "Ah the old “pull the drawbridge up after themselves approach” | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" If not, would you agree it is would stop an asylum seeker from claiming asylum to remain in the UK. Maybe, but it achieves the same aim. Arrive illegally then you are deported unless you claim asylum. If you claim asylum you go to Rwanda, and if your claim is accepted you stay in Rwanda - otherwise deported. You do realise that as part of the deal Rwvada send people back to the UK
Not according to the information I have seen.
I’m afraid it’s true. The whole thing is a disgusting sideshow and will not solve the scandal of tens of thousands (who knows how many?) of illegal immigrants coming to these shores with all of the resulting challenges.
"a portion of the most vulnerable"
So the policy has been sabotaged by the Civil Servants again. Using vague language to undermine it.
And of course Rwanda only agreed to take 1000 initially anyway.
So we need to start the Albania deportation flights ASAP. That returns a significant proportion.
Or just stop worrying about foreigners, stop reading the Daily Mail, or whichever media that's telling you that a small number of immigrants is causing all your problems.
Problem solved.
You mean a ‘large number of illegal unknown immigrants’. Nobody is claiming it’s the cause of all problems. Stop being so disingenuous
I don't get conned by fear mongering media blaming foriegners as a distraction. So I'm not being disingenuous.
But thanks for your concern
But the fear mongering is in your head.
Nope. It's in all the Daily Mail etc and it's in all your threads and posts complaining about foriegners.
You have a strange obsession with a national newspaper and a disingenuous way of exaggerating how things are reported to suit your narrative. I have no problem with ‘foreigners’, that would be odd as there are eight billion of them.
I do have a problem with any mad bad chancers that choose to come to these shores, by illegal means or by bucking the system. As indeed should you. It would be reckless not to, as recent events show.
You appear to be:
A. Suggesting that the Daily Mail doesn't whip up outrage about foriegners.
And
B. Arguing with yourself.
Nothing of the sort. Seek help, or form a higher opinion of the public. They are not as influenced as you by a newspaper.
People are allowed to have and to air a different opinion to you, it’s still allowed to agree to disagree.
You appear to be confused. The only opinion I am offering, is on your posts, and the things you say on here.
I do not need to "seek help". What a ridiculous thing to say.
Anyone on here that likes to administer a severe naked spanking with the Mail, dressed as Maggie Thatcher? Could have a gig for you.
What's this got to do with your confusion over nationality and your constant complaining about foriegners, followed up by denying what you just said?
Is this related to your low quality personal insults?
No confusion and no concern with foreigners. Just stifling a yawn though with the tedium of asking to keep it real. Don’t make stuff up. I’ve never denied any comment , but do feel the need to alert others to stuff twisted or taken out of context.
I know it suits you to put me down as a rabid racist or a right wing fascist when of course I am nothing of the sort. Quite the opposite in fact. A very open minded liberal with a social conscience and a big heart. In fact, my Tanzanian girlfriend is often complaining that I’m too soft!
Is she into swinging?
No."She doesn’t mind you swinging and being on Fab? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" If not, would you agree it is would stop an asylum seeker from claiming asylum to remain in the UK. Maybe, but it achieves the same aim. Arrive illegally then you are deported unless you claim asylum. If you claim asylum you go to Rwanda, and if your claim is accepted you stay in Rwanda - otherwise deported. You do realise that as part of the deal Rwvada send people back to the UK
Not according to the information I have seen.
I’m afraid it’s true. The whole thing is a disgusting sideshow and will not solve the scandal of tens of thousands (who knows how many?) of illegal immigrants coming to these shores with all of the resulting challenges.
"a portion of the most vulnerable"
So the policy has been sabotaged by the Civil Servants again. Using vague language to undermine it.
And of course Rwanda only agreed to take 1000 initially anyway.
So we need to start the Albania deportation flights ASAP. That returns a significant proportion.
Or just stop worrying about foreigners, stop reading the Daily Mail, or whichever media that's telling you that a small number of immigrants is causing all your problems.
Problem solved.
You mean a ‘large number of illegal unknown immigrants’. Nobody is claiming it’s the cause of all problems. Stop being so disingenuous
I don't get conned by fear mongering media blaming foriegners as a distraction. So I'm not being disingenuous.
But thanks for your concern
But the fear mongering is in your head.
Nope. It's in all the Daily Mail etc and it's in all your threads and posts complaining about foriegners.
You have a strange obsession with a national newspaper and a disingenuous way of exaggerating how things are reported to suit your narrative. I have no problem with ‘foreigners’, that would be odd as there are eight billion of them.
I do have a problem with any mad bad chancers that choose to come to these shores, by illegal means or by bucking the system. As indeed should you. It would be reckless not to, as recent events show.
You appear to be:
A. Suggesting that the Daily Mail doesn't whip up outrage about foriegners.
And
B. Arguing with yourself.
Nothing of the sort. Seek help, or form a higher opinion of the public. They are not as influenced as you by a newspaper.
People are allowed to have and to air a different opinion to you, it’s still allowed to agree to disagree.
You appear to be confused. The only opinion I am offering, is on your posts, and the things you say on here.
I do not need to "seek help". What a ridiculous thing to say.
Anyone on here that likes to administer a severe naked spanking with the Mail, dressed as Maggie Thatcher? Could have a gig for you.
What's this got to do with your confusion over nationality and your constant complaining about foriegners, followed up by denying what you just said?
Is this related to your low quality personal insults?
No confusion and no concern with foreigners. Just stifling a yawn though with the tedium of asking to keep it real. Don’t make stuff up. I’ve never denied any comment , but do feel the need to alert others to stuff twisted or taken out of context.
I know it suits you to put me down as a rabid racist or a right wing fascist when of course I am nothing of the sort. Quite the opposite in fact. A very open minded liberal with a social conscience and a big heart. In fact, my Tanzanian girlfriend is often complaining that I’m too soft!
Blimey, if she thinks your obsession with immigrants and foriegners is too soft. Then she must be properly hardcore.
Or of course, this could all be bullshit.
Actually, most people from abroad that I talk to have a fairly hardline on open or illegal immigration compared to me. An Estonian woman that’s lived here for 20 years, married to an old colleague and friend voted for Brexit can you believe?
Ah the old “pull the drawbridge up after themselves approach”"Tbh, it’s the old ‘that never happened’ anecdote , Seb has several to try and justify his confused views | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Haven't had time with work over the last few days, can't speak for Pat. Some labourites have incredible jobs (despite bemoaning economy under Tories) to come on here most of the working day, rattling their handbags over the latest Govt 'outrage'. Since you brought up Pmqs, what a debut performance from Rishi! Rattled Starmer’s eyes bobbing about, Sunak's attack lines came thick and fast, leaving the great pointless human bollard with nowhere to go. Best comeback on Braverman's second go at Home Secretary, Sunak told stuttering Starmer that he'd twice tried to get Corbyn elected ha ha. And on the alleged 'no mandate' routine Starmer now trots out, Sunak told him he had a nerve, trying to get Brexit stopped for years when that was a democratic mandate from the electorate! Poor old Captain Hindsight looked troubled, rattled, as if to say nobody told me Sunak'd be this good! He outperformed his peers and lefty liberals with his fantastic performance. After day one, it’s definitely Sunak one, Starmer Chameleon Nil " I know everyone is going to rip the piss out of this. Before they do, I'd love to know if you're genuine or just trolling. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Haven't had time with work over the last few days, can't speak for Pat. Some labourites have incredible jobs (despite bemoaning economy under Tories) to come on here most of the working day, rattling their handbags over the latest Govt 'outrage'. Since you brought up Pmqs, what a debut performance from Rishi! Rattled Starmer’s eyes bobbing about, Sunak's attack lines came thick and fast, leaving the great pointless human bollard with nowhere to go. Best comeback on Braverman's second go at Home Secretary, Sunak told stuttering Starmer that he'd twice tried to get Corbyn elected ha ha. And on the alleged 'no mandate' routine Starmer now trots out, Sunak told him he had a nerve, trying to get Brexit stopped for years when that was a democratic mandate from the electorate! Poor old Captain Hindsight looked troubled, rattled, as if to say nobody told me Sunak'd be this good! He outperformed his peers and lefty liberals with his fantastic performance. After day one, it’s definitely Sunak one, Starmer Chameleon Nil I know everyone is going to rip the piss out of this. Before they do, I'd love to know if you're genuine or just trolling. " OK, let's hear your opinion of yesterday's Pmqs? I know the lefties on here hate people having a different opinion to them, but do you really think Starmer played a blinder yesterday? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Haven't had time with work over the last few days, can't speak for Pat. Some labourites have incredible jobs (despite bemoaning economy under Tories) to come on here most of the working day, rattling their handbags over the latest Govt 'outrage'. Since you brought up Pmqs, what a debut performance from Rishi! Rattled Starmer’s eyes bobbing about, Sunak's attack lines came thick and fast, leaving the great pointless human bollard with nowhere to go. Best comeback on Braverman's second go at Home Secretary, Sunak told stuttering Starmer that he'd twice tried to get Corbyn elected ha ha. And on the alleged 'no mandate' routine Starmer now trots out, Sunak told him he had a nerve, trying to get Brexit stopped for years when that was a democratic mandate from the electorate! Poor old Captain Hindsight looked troubled, rattled, as if to say nobody told me Sunak'd be this good! He outperformed his peers and lefty liberals with his fantastic performance. After day one, it’s definitely Sunak one, Starmer Chameleon Nil I know everyone is going to rip the piss out of this. Before they do, I'd love to know if you're genuine or just trolling. OK, let's hear your opinion of yesterday's Pmqs? I know the lefties on here hate people having a different opinion to them, but do you really think Starmer played a blinder yesterday? " I'm not a leftie. And I was just asking if you're for real. I assume you're saying you are. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Haven't had time with work over the last few days, can't speak for Pat. Some labourites have incredible jobs (despite bemoaning economy under Tories) to come on here most of the working day, rattling their handbags over the latest Govt 'outrage'. Since you brought up Pmqs, what a debut performance from Rishi! Rattled Starmer’s eyes bobbing about, Sunak's attack lines came thick and fast, leaving the great pointless human bollard with nowhere to go. Best comeback on Braverman's second go at Home Secretary, Sunak told stuttering Starmer that he'd twice tried to get Corbyn elected ha ha. And on the alleged 'no mandate' routine Starmer now trots out, Sunak told him he had a nerve, trying to get Brexit stopped for years when that was a democratic mandate from the electorate! Poor old Captain Hindsight looked troubled, rattled, as if to say nobody told me Sunak'd be this good! He outperformed his peers and lefty liberals with his fantastic performance. After day one, it’s definitely Sunak one, Starmer Chameleon Nil " Sunak held his own at PMQs, but as I am constantly reminded, the vast majority of the population don’t watch or give a shit about it | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Haven't had time with work over the last few days, can't speak for Pat. Some labourites have incredible jobs (despite bemoaning economy under Tories) to come on here most of the working day, rattling their handbags over the latest Govt 'outrage'. Since you brought up Pmqs, what a debut performance from Rishi! Rattled Starmer’s eyes bobbing about, Sunak's attack lines came thick and fast, leaving the great pointless human bollard with nowhere to go. Best comeback on Braverman's second go at Home Secretary, Sunak told stuttering Starmer that he'd twice tried to get Corbyn elected ha ha. And on the alleged 'no mandate' routine Starmer now trots out, Sunak told him he had a nerve, trying to get Brexit stopped for years when that was a democratic mandate from the electorate! Poor old Captain Hindsight looked troubled, rattled, as if to say nobody told me Sunak'd be this good! He outperformed his peers and lefty liberals with his fantastic performance. After day one, it’s definitely Sunak one, Starmer Chameleon Nil " And btw, I have a job, but my money works for me , I don’t work for my money | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Haven't had time with work over the last few days, can't speak for Pat. Some labourites have incredible jobs (despite bemoaning economy under Tories) to come on here most of the working day, rattling their handbags over the latest Govt 'outrage'. Since you brought up Pmqs, what a debut performance from Rishi! Rattled Starmer’s eyes bobbing about, Sunak's attack lines came thick and fast, leaving the great pointless human bollard with nowhere to go. Best comeback on Braverman's second go at Home Secretary, Sunak told stuttering Starmer that he'd twice tried to get Corbyn elected ha ha. And on the alleged 'no mandate' routine Starmer now trots out, Sunak told him he had a nerve, trying to get Brexit stopped for years when that was a democratic mandate from the electorate! Poor old Captain Hindsight looked troubled, rattled, as if to say nobody told me Sunak'd be this good! He outperformed his peers and lefty liberals with his fantastic performance. After day one, it’s definitely Sunak one, Starmer Chameleon Nil And btw, I have a job, but my money works for me , I don’t work for my money " How do you mean? On Benefits? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Haven't had time with work over the last few days, can't speak for Pat. Some labourites have incredible jobs (despite bemoaning economy under Tories) to come on here most of the working day, rattling their handbags over the latest Govt 'outrage'. Since you brought up Pmqs, what a debut performance from Rishi! Rattled Starmer’s eyes bobbing about, Sunak's attack lines came thick and fast, leaving the great pointless human bollard with nowhere to go. Best comeback on Braverman's second go at Home Secretary, Sunak told stuttering Starmer that he'd twice tried to get Corbyn elected ha ha. And on the alleged 'no mandate' routine Starmer now trots out, Sunak told him he had a nerve, trying to get Brexit stopped for years when that was a democratic mandate from the electorate! Poor old Captain Hindsight looked troubled, rattled, as if to say nobody told me Sunak'd be this good! He outperformed his peers and lefty liberals with his fantastic performance. After day one, it’s definitely Sunak one, Starmer Chameleon Nil Sunak held his own at PMQs, but as I am constantly reminded, the vast majority of the population don’t watch or give a shit about it "They watch clips of it on the news. It was talked about by 7 of us in the pub last night and even a couple of notional lefties agreed Sunak rattled Starmer big time. May not watch it at 12 noon but everyone sees news highlights, YouTube clips etc. Not even BBC bias can stop the truth of it emerging. Roasted! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Haven't had time with work over the last few days, can't speak for Pat. Some labourites have incredible jobs (despite bemoaning economy under Tories) to come on here most of the working day, rattling their handbags over the latest Govt 'outrage'. Since you brought up Pmqs, what a debut performance from Rishi! Rattled Starmer’s eyes bobbing about, Sunak's attack lines came thick and fast, leaving the great pointless human bollard with nowhere to go. Best comeback on Braverman's second go at Home Secretary, Sunak told stuttering Starmer that he'd twice tried to get Corbyn elected ha ha. And on the alleged 'no mandate' routine Starmer now trots out, Sunak told him he had a nerve, trying to get Brexit stopped for years when that was a democratic mandate from the electorate! Poor old Captain Hindsight looked troubled, rattled, as if to say nobody told me Sunak'd be this good! He outperformed his peers and lefty liberals with his fantastic performance. After day one, it’s definitely Sunak one, Starmer Chameleon Nil And btw, I have a job, but my money works for me , I don’t work for my money How do you mean? On Benefits? " There you go. Anyone who questions the government must be on benefits. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Haven't had time with work over the last few days, can't speak for Pat. Some labourites have incredible jobs (despite bemoaning economy under Tories) to come on here most of the working day, rattling their handbags over the latest Govt 'outrage'. Since you brought up Pmqs, what a debut performance from Rishi! Rattled Starmer’s eyes bobbing about, Sunak's attack lines came thick and fast, leaving the great pointless human bollard with nowhere to go. Best comeback on Braverman's second go at Home Secretary, Sunak told stuttering Starmer that he'd twice tried to get Corbyn elected ha ha. And on the alleged 'no mandate' routine Starmer now trots out, Sunak told him he had a nerve, trying to get Brexit stopped for years when that was a democratic mandate from the electorate! Poor old Captain Hindsight looked troubled, rattled, as if to say nobody told me Sunak'd be this good! He outperformed his peers and lefty liberals with his fantastic performance. After day one, it’s definitely Sunak one, Starmer Chameleon Nil Sunak held his own at PMQs, but as I am constantly reminded, the vast majority of the population don’t watch or give a shit about it
They watch clips of it on the news. It was talked about by 7 of us in the pub last night and even a couple of notional lefties agreed Sunak rattled Starmer big time. May not watch it at 12 noon but everyone sees news highlights, YouTube clips etc. Not even BBC bias can stop the truth of it emerging. Roasted! "Lol, okay, you're not for real.
Got it. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Haven't had time with work over the last few days, can't speak for Pat. Some labourites have incredible jobs (despite bemoaning economy under Tories) to come on here most of the working day, rattling their handbags over the latest Govt 'outrage'. Since you brought up Pmqs, what a debut performance from Rishi! Rattled Starmer’s eyes bobbing about, Sunak's attack lines came thick and fast, leaving the great pointless human bollard with nowhere to go. Best comeback on Braverman's second go at Home Secretary, Sunak told stuttering Starmer that he'd twice tried to get Corbyn elected ha ha. And on the alleged 'no mandate' routine Starmer now trots out, Sunak told him he had a nerve, trying to get Brexit stopped for years when that was a democratic mandate from the electorate! Poor old Captain Hindsight looked troubled, rattled, as if to say nobody told me Sunak'd be this good! He outperformed his peers and lefty liberals with his fantastic performance. After day one, it’s definitely Sunak one, Starmer Chameleon Nil And btw, I have a job, but my money works for me , I don’t work for my money How do you mean? On Benefits? " Nope, I probably earned more this week than you have all year  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Haven't had time with work over the last few days, can't speak for Pat. Some labourites have incredible jobs (despite bemoaning economy under Tories) to come on here most of the working day, rattling their handbags over the latest Govt 'outrage'. Since you brought up Pmqs, what a debut performance from Rishi! Rattled Starmer’s eyes bobbing about, Sunak's attack lines came thick and fast, leaving the great pointless human bollard with nowhere to go. Best comeback on Braverman's second go at Home Secretary, Sunak told stuttering Starmer that he'd twice tried to get Corbyn elected ha ha. And on the alleged 'no mandate' routine Starmer now trots out, Sunak told him he had a nerve, trying to get Brexit stopped for years when that was a democratic mandate from the electorate! Poor old Captain Hindsight looked troubled, rattled, as if to say nobody told me Sunak'd be this good! He outperformed his peers and lefty liberals with his fantastic performance. After day one, it’s definitely Sunak one, Starmer Chameleon Nil Sunak held his own at PMQs, but as I am constantly reminded, the vast majority of the population don’t watch or give a shit about it
They watch clips of it on the news. It was talked about by 7 of us in the pub last night and even a couple of notional lefties agreed Sunak rattled Starmer big time. May not watch it at 12 noon but everyone sees news highlights, YouTube clips etc. Not even BBC bias can stop the truth of it emerging. Roasted! "Wow, 7 off you, that is amazing , | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Haven't had time with work over the last few days, can't speak for Pat. Some labourites have incredible jobs (despite bemoaning economy under Tories) to come on here most of the working day, rattling their handbags over the latest Govt 'outrage'. Since you brought up Pmqs, what a debut performance from Rishi! Rattled Starmer’s eyes bobbing about, Sunak's attack lines came thick and fast, leaving the great pointless human bollard with nowhere to go. Best comeback on Braverman's second go at Home Secretary, Sunak told stuttering Starmer that he'd twice tried to get Corbyn elected ha ha. And on the alleged 'no mandate' routine Starmer now trots out, Sunak told him he had a nerve, trying to get Brexit stopped for years when that was a democratic mandate from the electorate! Poor old Captain Hindsight looked troubled, rattled, as if to say nobody told me Sunak'd be this good! He outperformed his peers and lefty liberals with his fantastic performance. After day one, it’s definitely Sunak one, Starmer Chameleon Nil And btw, I have a job, but my money works for me , I don’t work for my money How do you mean? On Benefits? Nope, I probably earned more this week than you have all year "Good for you! I am intensely relaxed about personal wealth. Why are you such a Labourite on here then, rattling your luvvy handbag all the time? Champagne socialist?  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Haven't had time with work over the last few days, can't speak for Pat. Some labourites have incredible jobs (despite bemoaning economy under Tories) to come on here most of the working day, rattling their handbags over the latest Govt 'outrage'. Since you brought up Pmqs, what a debut performance from Rishi! Rattled Starmer’s eyes bobbing about, Sunak's attack lines came thick and fast, leaving the great pointless human bollard with nowhere to go. Best comeback on Braverman's second go at Home Secretary, Sunak told stuttering Starmer that he'd twice tried to get Corbyn elected ha ha. And on the alleged 'no mandate' routine Starmer now trots out, Sunak told him he had a nerve, trying to get Brexit stopped for years when that was a democratic mandate from the electorate! Poor old Captain Hindsight looked troubled, rattled, as if to say nobody told me Sunak'd be this good! He outperformed his peers and lefty liberals with his fantastic performance. After day one, it’s definitely Sunak one, Starmer Chameleon Nil Sunak held his own at PMQs, but as I am constantly reminded, the vast majority of the population don’t watch or give a shit about it
They watch clips of it on the news. It was talked about by 7 of us in the pub last night and even a couple of notional lefties agreed Sunak rattled Starmer big time. May not watch it at 12 noon but everyone sees news highlights, YouTube clips etc. Not even BBC bias can stop the truth of it emerging. Roasted! "I can just guess who some of that magnificent seven were! Pat. Hay. Cheshire. Seb. A couple of benefits claiming notional lefties (hope they bought a round). + 1 + perhaps a girlfriend from abroad or maybe that chap from Cap D’Agde? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Haven't had time with work over the last few days, can't speak for Pat. Some labourites have incredible jobs (despite bemoaning economy under Tories) to come on here most of the working day, rattling their handbags over the latest Govt 'outrage'. Since you brought up Pmqs, what a debut performance from Rishi! Rattled Starmer’s eyes bobbing about, Sunak's attack lines came thick and fast, leaving the great pointless human bollard with nowhere to go. Best comeback on Braverman's second go at Home Secretary, Sunak told stuttering Starmer that he'd twice tried to get Corbyn elected ha ha. And on the alleged 'no mandate' routine Starmer now trots out, Sunak told him he had a nerve, trying to get Brexit stopped for years when that was a democratic mandate from the electorate! Poor old Captain Hindsight looked troubled, rattled, as if to say nobody told me Sunak'd be this good! He outperformed his peers and lefty liberals with his fantastic performance. After day one, it’s definitely Sunak one, Starmer Chameleon Nil Sunak held his own at PMQs, but as I am constantly reminded, the vast majority of the population don’t watch or give a shit about it
They watch clips of it on the news. It was talked about by 7 of us in the pub last night and even a couple of notional lefties agreed Sunak rattled Starmer big time. May not watch it at 12 noon but everyone sees news highlights, YouTube clips etc. Not even BBC bias can stop the truth of it emerging. Roasted!
Wow, 7 off you, that is amazing , "7 off me?
You're still mangling the English language then whilst making millyons | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Haven't had time with work over the last few days, can't speak for Pat. Some labourites have incredible jobs (despite bemoaning economy under Tories) to come on here most of the working day, rattling their handbags over the latest Govt 'outrage'. Since you brought up Pmqs, what a debut performance from Rishi! Rattled Starmer’s eyes bobbing about, Sunak's attack lines came thick and fast, leaving the great pointless human bollard with nowhere to go. Best comeback on Braverman's second go at Home Secretary, Sunak told stuttering Starmer that he'd twice tried to get Corbyn elected ha ha. And on the alleged 'no mandate' routine Starmer now trots out, Sunak told him he had a nerve, trying to get Brexit stopped for years when that was a democratic mandate from the electorate! Poor old Captain Hindsight looked troubled, rattled, as if to say nobody told me Sunak'd be this good! He outperformed his peers and lefty liberals with his fantastic performance. After day one, it’s definitely Sunak one, Starmer Chameleon Nil And btw, I have a job, but my money works for me , I don’t work for my money How do you mean? On Benefits? Nope, I probably earned more this week than you have all year
Good for you!
I am intensely relaxed about personal wealth.
Why are you such a Labourite on here then, rattling your luvvy handbag all the time?
Champagne socialist?
"I didn’t vote labour at the last 2 elections, and will probably vote green at the next election . I am anti this government , does that make me a luvvy lefty? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Haven't had time with work over the last few days, can't speak for Pat. Some labourites have incredible jobs (despite bemoaning economy under Tories) to come on here most of the working day, rattling their handbags over the latest Govt 'outrage'. Since you brought up Pmqs, what a debut performance from Rishi! Rattled Starmer’s eyes bobbing about, Sunak's attack lines came thick and fast, leaving the great pointless human bollard with nowhere to go. Best comeback on Braverman's second go at Home Secretary, Sunak told stuttering Starmer that he'd twice tried to get Corbyn elected ha ha. And on the alleged 'no mandate' routine Starmer now trots out, Sunak told him he had a nerve, trying to get Brexit stopped for years when that was a democratic mandate from the electorate! Poor old Captain Hindsight looked troubled, rattled, as if to say nobody told me Sunak'd be this good! He outperformed his peers and lefty liberals with his fantastic performance. After day one, it’s definitely Sunak one, Starmer Chameleon Nil Sunak held his own at PMQs, but as I am constantly reminded, the vast majority of the population don’t watch or give a shit about it
They watch clips of it on the news. It was talked about by 7 of us in the pub last night and even a couple of notional lefties agreed Sunak rattled Starmer big time. May not watch it at 12 noon but everyone sees news highlights, YouTube clips etc. Not even BBC bias can stop the truth of it emerging. Roasted!
Wow, 7 off you, that is amazing ,
7 off me?
You're still mangling the English language then whilst making millyons "7 people, very impressive , that will sway the opinion polls | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Haven't had time with work over the last few days, can't speak for Pat. Some labourites have incredible jobs (despite bemoaning economy under Tories) to come on here most of the working day, rattling their handbags over the latest Govt 'outrage'. Since you brought up Pmqs, what a debut performance from Rishi! Rattled Starmer’s eyes bobbing about, Sunak's attack lines came thick and fast, leaving the great pointless human bollard with nowhere to go. Best comeback on Braverman's second go at Home Secretary, Sunak told stuttering Starmer that he'd twice tried to get Corbyn elected ha ha. And on the alleged 'no mandate' routine Starmer now trots out, Sunak told him he had a nerve, trying to get Brexit stopped for years when that was a democratic mandate from the electorate! Poor old Captain Hindsight looked troubled, rattled, as if to say nobody told me Sunak'd be this good! He outperformed his peers and lefty liberals with his fantastic performance. After day one, it’s definitely Sunak one, Starmer Chameleon Nil And btw, I have a job, but my money works for me , I don’t work for my money How do you mean? On Benefits? Nope, I probably earned more this week than you have all year
Good for you!
I am intensely relaxed about personal wealth.
Why are you such a Labourite on here then, rattling your luvvy handbag all the time?
Champagne socialist?
I didn’t vote labour at the last 2 elections, and will probably vote green at the next election . I am anti this government , does that make me a luvvy lefty? "Lmao, virtue signalling fairy tales would best sum the Greens policies up. A pipe dream meets reality. And reality is winning, as she so often does
And I know you love a winner | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Haven't had time with work over the last few days, can't speak for Pat. Some labourites have incredible jobs (despite bemoaning economy under Tories) to come on here most of the working day, rattling their handbags over the latest Govt 'outrage'. Since you brought up Pmqs, what a debut performance from Rishi! Rattled Starmer’s eyes bobbing about, Sunak's attack lines came thick and fast, leaving the great pointless human bollard with nowhere to go. Best comeback on Braverman's second go at Home Secretary, Sunak told stuttering Starmer that he'd twice tried to get Corbyn elected ha ha. And on the alleged 'no mandate' routine Starmer now trots out, Sunak told him he had a nerve, trying to get Brexit stopped for years when that was a democratic mandate from the electorate! Poor old Captain Hindsight looked troubled, rattled, as if to say nobody told me Sunak'd be this good! He outperformed his peers and lefty liberals with his fantastic performance. After day one, it’s definitely Sunak one, Starmer Chameleon Nil And btw, I have a job, but my money works for me , I don’t work for my money How do you mean? On Benefits? Nope, I probably earned more this week than you have all year
Good for you!
I am intensely relaxed about personal wealth.
Why are you such a Labourite on here then, rattling your luvvy handbag all the time?
Champagne socialist?
I didn’t vote labour at the last 2 elections, and will probably vote green at the next election . I am anti this government , does that make me a luvvy lefty?
Lmao, virtue signalling fairy tales would best sum the Greens policies up.
A pipe dream meets reality. And reality is winning, as she so often does
And I know you love a winner "PMSL, I had a chat with ‘8’ people in the pub and they all agree with the green parties policies, that is 1 more than your group, whatever can this mean? Have you always voted Tory? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Haven't had time with work over the last few days, can't speak for Pat. Some labourites have incredible jobs (despite bemoaning economy under Tories) to come on here most of the working day, rattling their handbags over the latest Govt 'outrage'. Since you brought up Pmqs, what a debut performance from Rishi! Rattled Starmer’s eyes bobbing about, Sunak's attack lines came thick and fast, leaving the great pointless human bollard with nowhere to go. Best comeback on Braverman's second go at Home Secretary, Sunak told stuttering Starmer that he'd twice tried to get Corbyn elected ha ha. And on the alleged 'no mandate' routine Starmer now trots out, Sunak told him he had a nerve, trying to get Brexit stopped for years when that was a democratic mandate from the electorate! Poor old Captain Hindsight looked troubled, rattled, as if to say nobody told me Sunak'd be this good! He outperformed his peers and lefty liberals with his fantastic performance. After day one, it’s definitely Sunak one, Starmer Chameleon Nil And btw, I have a job, but my money works for me , I don’t work for my money How do you mean? On Benefits? Nope, I probably earned more this week than you have all year
Good for you!
I am intensely relaxed about personal wealth.
Why are you such a Labourite on here then, rattling your luvvy handbag all the time?
Champagne socialist?
I didn’t vote labour at the last 2 elections, and will probably vote green at the next election . I am anti this government , does that make me a luvvy lefty?
Lmao, virtue signalling fairy tales would best sum the Greens policies up.
A pipe dream meets reality. And reality is winning, as she so often does
And I know you love a winner
PMSL, I had a chat with ‘8’ people in the pub and they all agree with the green parties policies, that is 1 more than your group, whatever can this mean? Have you always voted Tory? "I did vote Labour in 1997 and 2001. So yes, always Tory | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Haven't had time with work over the last few days, can't speak for Pat. Some labourites have incredible jobs (despite bemoaning economy under Tories) to come on here most of the working day, rattling their handbags over the latest Govt 'outrage'. Since you brought up Pmqs, what a debut performance from Rishi! Rattled Starmer’s eyes bobbing about, Sunak's attack lines came thick and fast, leaving the great pointless human bollard with nowhere to go. Best comeback on Braverman's second go at Home Secretary, Sunak told stuttering Starmer that he'd twice tried to get Corbyn elected ha ha. And on the alleged 'no mandate' routine Starmer now trots out, Sunak told him he had a nerve, trying to get Brexit stopped for years when that was a democratic mandate from the electorate! Poor old Captain Hindsight looked troubled, rattled, as if to say nobody told me Sunak'd be this good! He outperformed his peers and lefty liberals with his fantastic performance. After day one, it’s definitely Sunak one, Starmer Chameleon Nil And btw, I have a job, but my money works for me , I don’t work for my money How do you mean? On Benefits? Nope, I probably earned more this week than you have all year
Good for you!
I am intensely relaxed about personal wealth.
Why are you such a Labourite on here then, rattling your luvvy handbag all the time?
Champagne socialist?
I didn’t vote labour at the last 2 elections, and will probably vote green at the next election . I am anti this government , does that make me a luvvy lefty?
Lmao, virtue signalling fairy tales would best sum the Greens policies up.
A pipe dream meets reality. And reality is winning, as she so often does
And I know you love a winner
PMSL, I had a chat with ‘8’ people in the pub and they all agree with the green parties policies, that is 1 more than your group, whatever can this mean? Have you always voted Tory? "9 greens? I thought we only needed 5 a day?
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Haven't had time with work over the last few days, can't speak for Pat. Some labourites have incredible jobs (despite bemoaning economy under Tories) to come on here most of the working day, rattling their handbags over the latest Govt 'outrage'. Since you brought up Pmqs, what a debut performance from Rishi! Rattled Starmer’s eyes bobbing about, Sunak's attack lines came thick and fast, leaving the great pointless human bollard with nowhere to go. Best comeback on Braverman's second go at Home Secretary, Sunak told stuttering Starmer that he'd twice tried to get Corbyn elected ha ha. And on the alleged 'no mandate' routine Starmer now trots out, Sunak told him he had a nerve, trying to get Brexit stopped for years when that was a democratic mandate from the electorate! Poor old Captain Hindsight looked troubled, rattled, as if to say nobody told me Sunak'd be this good! He outperformed his peers and lefty liberals with his fantastic performance. After day one, it’s definitely Sunak one, Starmer Chameleon Nil And btw, I have a job, but my money works for me , I don’t work for my money How do you mean? On Benefits? Nope, I probably earned more this week than you have all year
Good for you!
I am intensely relaxed about personal wealth.
Why are you such a Labourite on here then, rattling your luvvy handbag all the time?
Champagne socialist?
I didn’t vote labour at the last 2 elections, and will probably vote green at the next election . I am anti this government , does that make me a luvvy lefty?
Lmao, virtue signalling fairy tales would best sum the Greens policies up.
A pipe dream meets reality. And reality is winning, as she so often does
And I know you love a winner
PMSL, I had a chat with ‘8’ people in the pub and they all agree with the green parties policies, that is 1 more than your group, whatever can this mean? Have you always voted Tory?
I did vote Labour in 1997 and 2001.
So yes, always Tory "Of course you did, so let’s pretend that is true, you were a ‘loser’ in 2005? I have heard that Starmer is shitting his pants since he hearing the news about the 7 people in a pub criticising his performance at PMQs , | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" If not, would you agree it is would stop an asylum seeker from claiming asylum to remain in the UK. Maybe, but it achieves the same aim. Arrive illegally then you are deported unless you claim asylum. If you claim asylum you go to Rwanda, and if your claim is accepted you stay in Rwanda - otherwise deported. You do realise that as part of the deal Rwvada send people back to the UK
Not according to the information I have seen.
I’m afraid it’s true. The whole thing is a disgusting sideshow and will not solve the scandal of tens of thousands (who knows how many?) of illegal immigrants coming to these shores with all of the resulting challenges.
"a portion of the most vulnerable"
So the policy has been sabotaged by the Civil Servants again. Using vague language to undermine it.
And of course Rwanda only agreed to take 1000 initially anyway.
So we need to start the Albania deportation flights ASAP. That returns a significant proportion.
Or just stop worrying about foreigners, stop reading the Daily Mail, or whichever media that's telling you that a small number of immigrants is causing all your problems.
Problem solved.
You mean a ‘large number of illegal unknown immigrants’. Nobody is claiming it’s the cause of all problems. Stop being so disingenuous
I don't get conned by fear mongering media blaming foriegners as a distraction. So I'm not being disingenuous.
But thanks for your concern
But the fear mongering is in your head.
Nope. It's in all the Daily Mail etc and it's in all your threads and posts complaining about foriegners.
You have a strange obsession with a national newspaper and a disingenuous way of exaggerating how things are reported to suit your narrative. I have no problem with ‘foreigners’, that would be odd as there are eight billion of them.
I do have a problem with any mad bad chancers that choose to come to these shores, by illegal means or by bucking the system. As indeed should you. It would be reckless not to, as recent events show.
You appear to be:
A. Suggesting that the Daily Mail doesn't whip up outrage about foriegners.
And
B. Arguing with yourself.
Nothing of the sort. Seek help, or form a higher opinion of the public. They are not as influenced as you by a newspaper.
People are allowed to have and to air a different opinion to you, it’s still allowed to agree to disagree.
You appear to be confused. The only opinion I am offering, is on your posts, and the things you say on here.
I do not need to "seek help". What a ridiculous thing to say.
Anyone on here that likes to administer a severe naked spanking with the Mail, dressed as Maggie Thatcher? Could have a gig for you.
What's this got to do with your confusion over nationality and your constant complaining about foriegners, followed up by denying what you just said?
Is this related to your low quality personal insults?
No confusion and no concern with foreigners. Just stifling a yawn though with the tedium of asking to keep it real. Don’t make stuff up. I’ve never denied any comment , but do feel the need to alert others to stuff twisted or taken out of context.
I know it suits you to put me down as a rabid racist or a right wing fascist when of course I am nothing of the sort. Quite the opposite in fact. A very open minded liberal with a social conscience and a big heart. In fact, my Tanzanian girlfriend is often complaining that I’m too soft!
Blimey, if she thinks your obsession with immigrants and foriegners is too soft. Then she must be properly hardcore.
Or of course, this could all be bullshit.
Actually, most people from abroad that I talk to have a fairly hardline on open or illegal immigration compared to me. An Estonian woman that’s lived here for 20 years, married to an old colleague and friend voted for Brexit can you believe?
Yes. Now you're getting it! Judge people on their character, not on their nationality.
It feels like we've had a breakthrough. Maybe this will be the end of your lazy foreigner bashing rhetoric.
Once again for clarity - I never have and never will judge anyone on their nationality. Or for that matter posted any lazy rhetoric. As I said , although clearly this doesn’t apply to the Fab forum, people can have different views, and it’s ok to agree to disagree.
When you were trying to suggest that Rishi Sunsk wasn’t British you stated ‘Jesus Christ was born in a stables, that doesn’t make him a horse’ , that is lazy rhetoric "No it’s not. People with a sense of humour find stuff like that funny. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" If not, would you agree it is would stop an asylum seeker from claiming asylum to remain in the UK. Maybe, but it achieves the same aim. Arrive illegally then you are deported unless you claim asylum. If you claim asylum you go to Rwanda, and if your claim is accepted you stay in Rwanda - otherwise deported. You do realise that as part of the deal Rwvada send people back to the UK
Not according to the information I have seen.
I’m afraid it’s true. The whole thing is a disgusting sideshow and will not solve the scandal of tens of thousands (who knows how many?) of illegal immigrants coming to these shores with all of the resulting challenges.
"a portion of the most vulnerable"
So the policy has been sabotaged by the Civil Servants again. Using vague language to undermine it.
And of course Rwanda only agreed to take 1000 initially anyway.
So we need to start the Albania deportation flights ASAP. That returns a significant proportion.
Or just stop worrying about foreigners, stop reading the Daily Mail, or whichever media that's telling you that a small number of immigrants is causing all your problems.
Problem solved.
You mean a ‘large number of illegal unknown immigrants’. Nobody is claiming it’s the cause of all problems. Stop being so disingenuous
I don't get conned by fear mongering media blaming foriegners as a distraction. So I'm not being disingenuous.
But thanks for your concern
But the fear mongering is in your head.
Nope. It's in all the Daily Mail etc and it's in all your threads and posts complaining about foriegners.
You have a strange obsession with a national newspaper and a disingenuous way of exaggerating how things are reported to suit your narrative. I have no problem with ‘foreigners’, that would be odd as there are eight billion of them.
I do have a problem with any mad bad chancers that choose to come to these shores, by illegal means or by bucking the system. As indeed should you. It would be reckless not to, as recent events show.
You appear to be:
A. Suggesting that the Daily Mail doesn't whip up outrage about foriegners.
And
B. Arguing with yourself.
Nothing of the sort. Seek help, or form a higher opinion of the public. They are not as influenced as you by a newspaper.
People are allowed to have and to air a different opinion to you, it’s still allowed to agree to disagree.
You appear to be confused. The only opinion I am offering, is on your posts, and the things you say on here.
I do not need to "seek help". What a ridiculous thing to say.
Anyone on here that likes to administer a severe naked spanking with the Mail, dressed as Maggie Thatcher? Could have a gig for you.
What's this got to do with your confusion over nationality and your constant complaining about foriegners, followed up by denying what you just said?
Is this related to your low quality personal insults?
No confusion and no concern with foreigners. Just stifling a yawn though with the tedium of asking to keep it real. Don’t make stuff up. I’ve never denied any comment , but do feel the need to alert others to stuff twisted or taken out of context.
I know it suits you to put me down as a rabid racist or a right wing fascist when of course I am nothing of the sort. Quite the opposite in fact. A very open minded liberal with a social conscience and a big heart. In fact, my Tanzanian girlfriend is often complaining that I’m too soft!
Blimey, if she thinks your obsession with immigrants and foriegners is too soft. Then she must be properly hardcore.
Or of course, this could all be bullshit.
Actually, most people from abroad that I talk to have a fairly hardline on open or illegal immigration compared to me. An Estonian woman that’s lived here for 20 years, married to an old colleague and friend voted for Brexit can you believe?
Yes. Now you're getting it! Judge people on their character, not on their nationality.
It feels like we've had a breakthrough. Maybe this will be the end of your lazy foreigner bashing rhetoric.
Once again for clarity - I never have and never will judge anyone on their nationality. Or for that matter posted any lazy rhetoric. As I said , although clearly this doesn’t apply to the Fab forum, people can have different views, and it’s ok to agree to disagree.
When you were trying to suggest that Rishi Sunsk wasn’t British you stated ‘Jesus Christ was born in a stables, that doesn’t make him a horse’ , that is lazy rhetoric
No it’s not. People with a sense of humour find stuff like that funny."Ah, it was a joke, just like the rest of your ‘confused and angry about immigration ‘ material is a joke, I must stop taking you seriously | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" If not, would you agree it is would stop an asylum seeker from claiming asylum to remain in the UK. Maybe, but it achieves the same aim. Arrive illegally then you are deported unless you claim asylum. If you claim asylum you go to Rwanda, and if your claim is accepted you stay in Rwanda - otherwise deported. You do realise that as part of the deal Rwvada send people back to the UK
Not according to the information I have seen.
I’m afraid it’s true. The whole thing is a disgusting sideshow and will not solve the scandal of tens of thousands (who knows how many?) of illegal immigrants coming to these shores with all of the resulting challenges.
"a portion of the most vulnerable"
So the policy has been sabotaged by the Civil Servants again. Using vague language to undermine it.
And of course Rwanda only agreed to take 1000 initially anyway.
So we need to start the Albania deportation flights ASAP. That returns a significant proportion.
Or just stop worrying about foreigners, stop reading the Daily Mail, or whichever media that's telling you that a small number of immigrants is causing all your problems.
Problem solved.
You mean a ‘large number of illegal unknown immigrants’. Nobody is claiming it’s the cause of all problems. Stop being so disingenuous
I don't get conned by fear mongering media blaming foriegners as a distraction. So I'm not being disingenuous.
But thanks for your concern
But the fear mongering is in your head.
Nope. It's in all the Daily Mail etc and it's in all your threads and posts complaining about foriegners.
You have a strange obsession with a national newspaper and a disingenuous way of exaggerating how things are reported to suit your narrative. I have no problem with ‘foreigners’, that would be odd as there are eight billion of them.
I do have a problem with any mad bad chancers that choose to come to these shores, by illegal means or by bucking the system. As indeed should you. It would be reckless not to, as recent events show.
You appear to be:
A. Suggesting that the Daily Mail doesn't whip up outrage about foriegners.
And
B. Arguing with yourself.
Nothing of the sort. Seek help, or form a higher opinion of the public. They are not as influenced as you by a newspaper.
People are allowed to have and to air a different opinion to you, it’s still allowed to agree to disagree.
You appear to be confused. The only opinion I am offering, is on your posts, and the things you say on here.
I do not need to "seek help". What a ridiculous thing to say.
Anyone on here that likes to administer a severe naked spanking with the Mail, dressed as Maggie Thatcher? Could have a gig for you.
What's this got to do with your confusion over nationality and your constant complaining about foriegners, followed up by denying what you just said?
Is this related to your low quality personal insults?
No confusion and no concern with foreigners. Just stifling a yawn though with the tedium of asking to keep it real. Don’t make stuff up. I’ve never denied any comment , but do feel the need to alert others to stuff twisted or taken out of context.
I know it suits you to put me down as a rabid racist or a right wing fascist when of course I am nothing of the sort. Quite the opposite in fact. A very open minded liberal with a social conscience and a big heart. In fact, my Tanzanian girlfriend is often complaining that I’m too soft!
Is she into swinging?
No.
She doesn’t mind you swinging and being on Fab?"Blimey, she’s a girlfriend not a wife. We only meet several times a year and it’s very special indeed. Why spoil that? Although I am getting a bit too old for it all to be honest. As I am with the swinging . Really just here to entertain on the Forum. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" If not, would you agree it is would stop an asylum seeker from claiming asylum to remain in the UK. Maybe, but it achieves the same aim. Arrive illegally then you are deported unless you claim asylum. If you claim asylum you go to Rwanda, and if your claim is accepted you stay in Rwanda - otherwise deported. You do realise that as part of the deal Rwvada send people back to the UK
Not according to the information I have seen.
I’m afraid it’s true. The whole thing is a disgusting sideshow and will not solve the scandal of tens of thousands (who knows how many?) of illegal immigrants coming to these shores with all of the resulting challenges.
"a portion of the most vulnerable"
So the policy has been sabotaged by the Civil Servants again. Using vague language to undermine it.
And of course Rwanda only agreed to take 1000 initially anyway.
So we need to start the Albania deportation flights ASAP. That returns a significant proportion.
Or just stop worrying about foreigners, stop reading the Daily Mail, or whichever media that's telling you that a small number of immigrants is causing all your problems.
Problem solved.
You mean a ‘large number of illegal unknown immigrants’. Nobody is claiming it’s the cause of all problems. Stop being so disingenuous
I don't get conned by fear mongering media blaming foriegners as a distraction. So I'm not being disingenuous.
But thanks for your concern
But the fear mongering is in your head.
Nope. It's in all the Daily Mail etc and it's in all your threads and posts complaining about foriegners.
You have a strange obsession with a national newspaper and a disingenuous way of exaggerating how things are reported to suit your narrative. I have no problem with ‘foreigners’, that would be odd as there are eight billion of them.
I do have a problem with any mad bad chancers that choose to come to these shores, by illegal means or by bucking the system. As indeed should you. It would be reckless not to, as recent events show.
You appear to be:
A. Suggesting that the Daily Mail doesn't whip up outrage about foriegners.
And
B. Arguing with yourself.
Nothing of the sort. Seek help, or form a higher opinion of the public. They are not as influenced as you by a newspaper.
People are allowed to have and to air a different opinion to you, it’s still allowed to agree to disagree.
You appear to be confused. The only opinion I am offering, is on your posts, and the things you say on here.
I do not need to "seek help". What a ridiculous thing to say.
Anyone on here that likes to administer a severe naked spanking with the Mail, dressed as Maggie Thatcher? Could have a gig for you.
What's this got to do with your confusion over nationality and your constant complaining about foriegners, followed up by denying what you just said?
Is this related to your low quality personal insults?
No confusion and no concern with foreigners. Just stifling a yawn though with the tedium of asking to keep it real. Don’t make stuff up. I’ve never denied any comment , but do feel the need to alert others to stuff twisted or taken out of context.
I know it suits you to put me down as a rabid racist or a right wing fascist when of course I am nothing of the sort. Quite the opposite in fact. A very open minded liberal with a social conscience and a big heart. In fact, my Tanzanian girlfriend is often complaining that I’m too soft!
Blimey, if she thinks your obsession with immigrants and foriegners is too soft. Then she must be properly hardcore.
Or of course, this could all be bullshit.
Actually, most people from abroad that I talk to have a fairly hardline on open or illegal immigration compared to me. An Estonian woman that’s lived here for 20 years, married to an old colleague and friend voted for Brexit can you believe?
Yes. Now you're getting it! Judge people on their character, not on their nationality.
It feels like we've had a breakthrough. Maybe this will be the end of your lazy foreigner bashing rhetoric.
Once again for clarity - I never have and never will judge anyone on their nationality. Or for that matter posted any lazy rhetoric. As I said , although clearly this doesn’t apply to the Fab forum, people can have different views, and it’s ok to agree to disagree.
When you were trying to suggest that Rishi Sunsk wasn’t British you stated ‘Jesus Christ was born in a stables, that doesn’t make him a horse’ , that is lazy rhetoric
No it’s not. People with a sense of humour find stuff like that funny.
Ah, it was a joke, just like the rest of your ‘confused and angry about immigration ‘ material is a joke, I must stop taking you seriously "Again, and for clarity. No confusion and no denial. Stop making stuff up. It serves you no good, surely you are better than that? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" If not, would you agree it is would stop an asylum seeker from claiming asylum to remain in the UK. Maybe, but it achieves the same aim. Arrive illegally then you are deported unless you claim asylum. If you claim asylum you go to Rwanda, and if your claim is accepted you stay in Rwanda - otherwise deported. You do realise that as part of the deal Rwvada send people back to the UK
Not according to the information I have seen.
I’m afraid it’s true. The whole thing is a disgusting sideshow and will not solve the scandal of tens of thousands (who knows how many?) of illegal immigrants coming to these shores with all of the resulting challenges.
"a portion of the most vulnerable"
So the policy has been sabotaged by the Civil Servants again. Using vague language to undermine it.
And of course Rwanda only agreed to take 1000 initially anyway.
So we need to start the Albania deportation flights ASAP. That returns a significant proportion.
Or just stop worrying about foreigners, stop reading the Daily Mail, or whichever media that's telling you that a small number of immigrants is causing all your problems.
Problem solved.
You mean a ‘large number of illegal unknown immigrants’. Nobody is claiming it’s the cause of all problems. Stop being so disingenuous
I don't get conned by fear mongering media blaming foriegners as a distraction. So I'm not being disingenuous.
But thanks for your concern
But the fear mongering is in your head.
Nope. It's in all the Daily Mail etc and it's in all your threads and posts complaining about foriegners.
You have a strange obsession with a national newspaper and a disingenuous way of exaggerating how things are reported to suit your narrative. I have no problem with ‘foreigners’, that would be odd as there are eight billion of them.
I do have a problem with any mad bad chancers that choose to come to these shores, by illegal means or by bucking the system. As indeed should you. It would be reckless not to, as recent events show.
You appear to be:
A. Suggesting that the Daily Mail doesn't whip up outrage about foriegners.
And
B. Arguing with yourself.
Nothing of the sort. Seek help, or form a higher opinion of the public. They are not as influenced as you by a newspaper.
People are allowed to have and to air a different opinion to you, it’s still allowed to agree to disagree.
You appear to be confused. The only opinion I am offering, is on your posts, and the things you say on here.
I do not need to "seek help". What a ridiculous thing to say.
Anyone on here that likes to administer a severe naked spanking with the Mail, dressed as Maggie Thatcher? Could have a gig for you.
What's this got to do with your confusion over nationality and your constant complaining about foriegners, followed up by denying what you just said?
Is this related to your low quality personal insults?
No confusion and no concern with foreigners. Just stifling a yawn though with the tedium of asking to keep it real. Don’t make stuff up. I’ve never denied any comment , but do feel the need to alert others to stuff twisted or taken out of context.
I know it suits you to put me down as a rabid racist or a right wing fascist when of course I am nothing of the sort. Quite the opposite in fact. A very open minded liberal with a social conscience and a big heart. In fact, my Tanzanian girlfriend is often complaining that I’m too soft!
Blimey, if she thinks your obsession with immigrants and foriegners is too soft. Then she must be properly hardcore.
Or of course, this could all be bullshit.
Actually, most people from abroad that I talk to have a fairly hardline on open or illegal immigration compared to me. An Estonian woman that’s lived here for 20 years, married to an old colleague and friend voted for Brexit can you believe?
Yes. Now you're getting it! Judge people on their character, not on their nationality.
It feels like we've had a breakthrough. Maybe this will be the end of your lazy foreigner bashing rhetoric.
Once again for clarity - I never have and never will judge anyone on their nationality. Or for that matter posted any lazy rhetoric. As I said , although clearly this doesn’t apply to the Fab forum, people can have different views, and it’s ok to agree to disagree.
When you were trying to suggest that Rishi Sunsk wasn’t British you stated ‘Jesus Christ was born in a stables, that doesn’t make him a horse’ , that is lazy rhetoric
No it’s not. People with a sense of humour find stuff like that funny.
Ah, it was a joke, just like the rest of your ‘confused and angry about immigration ‘ material is a joke, I must stop taking you seriously
Again, and for clarity. No confusion and no denial. Stop making stuff up. It serves you no good, surely you are better than that? "Another joke? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Haven't had time with work over the last few days, can't speak for Pat. Some labourites have incredible jobs (despite bemoaning economy under Tories) to come on here most of the working day, rattling their handbags over the latest Govt 'outrage'. Since you brought up Pmqs, what a debut performance from Rishi! Rattled Starmer’s eyes bobbing about, Sunak's attack lines came thick and fast, leaving the great pointless human bollard with nowhere to go. Best comeback on Braverman's second go at Home Secretary, Sunak told stuttering Starmer that he'd twice tried to get Corbyn elected ha ha. And on the alleged 'no mandate' routine Starmer now trots out, Sunak told him he had a nerve, trying to get Brexit stopped for years when that was a democratic mandate from the electorate! Poor old Captain Hindsight looked troubled, rattled, as if to say nobody told me Sunak'd be this good! He outperformed his peers and lefty liberals with his fantastic performance. After day one, it’s definitely Sunak one, Starmer Chameleon Nil And btw, I have a job, but my money works for me , I don’t work for my money How do you mean? On Benefits? Nope, I probably earned more this week than you have all year
Good for you!
I am intensely relaxed about personal wealth.
Why are you such a Labourite on here then, rattling your luvvy handbag all the time?
Champagne socialist?
I didn’t vote labour at the last 2 elections, and will probably vote green at the next election . I am anti this government , does that make me a luvvy lefty?
Lmao, virtue signalling fairy tales would best sum the Greens policies up.
A pipe dream meets reality. And reality is winning, as she so often does
And I know you love a winner
PMSL, I had a chat with ‘8’ people in the pub and they all agree with the green parties policies, that is 1 more than your group, whatever can this mean? Have you always voted Tory?
9 greens? I thought we only needed 5 a day?
"Actually like everything in the UK we cut corners. In Denmark they promote 7 a day! Gotta love those Scandies! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" If not, would you agree it is would stop an asylum seeker from claiming asylum to remain in the UK. Maybe, but it achieves the same aim. Arrive illegally then you are deported unless you claim asylum. If you claim asylum you go to Rwanda, and if your claim is accepted you stay in Rwanda - otherwise deported. You do realise that as part of the deal Rwvada send people back to the UK
Not according to the information I have seen.
I’m afraid it’s true. The whole thing is a disgusting sideshow and will not solve the scandal of tens of thousands (who knows how many?) of illegal immigrants coming to these shores with all of the resulting challenges.
"a portion of the most vulnerable"
So the policy has been sabotaged by the Civil Servants again. Using vague language to undermine it.
And of course Rwanda only agreed to take 1000 initially anyway.
So we need to start the Albania deportation flights ASAP. That returns a significant proportion.
Or just stop worrying about foreigners, stop reading the Daily Mail, or whichever media that's telling you that a small number of immigrants is causing all your problems.
Problem solved.
You mean a ‘large number of illegal unknown immigrants’. Nobody is claiming it’s the cause of all problems. Stop being so disingenuous
I don't get conned by fear mongering media blaming foriegners as a distraction. So I'm not being disingenuous.
But thanks for your concern
But the fear mongering is in your head.
Nope. It's in all the Daily Mail etc and it's in all your threads and posts complaining about foriegners.
You have a strange obsession with a national newspaper and a disingenuous way of exaggerating how things are reported to suit your narrative. I have no problem with ‘foreigners’, that would be odd as there are eight billion of them.
I do have a problem with any mad bad chancers that choose to come to these shores, by illegal means or by bucking the system. As indeed should you. It would be reckless not to, as recent events show.
You appear to be:
A. Suggesting that the Daily Mail doesn't whip up outrage about foriegners.
And
B. Arguing with yourself.
Nothing of the sort. Seek help, or form a higher opinion of the public. They are not as influenced as you by a newspaper.
People are allowed to have and to air a different opinion to you, it’s still allowed to agree to disagree.
You appear to be confused. The only opinion I am offering, is on your posts, and the things you say on here.
I do not need to "seek help". What a ridiculous thing to say.
Anyone on here that likes to administer a severe naked spanking with the Mail, dressed as Maggie Thatcher? Could have a gig for you.
What's this got to do with your confusion over nationality and your constant complaining about foriegners, followed up by denying what you just said?
Is this related to your low quality personal insults?
No confusion and no concern with foreigners. Just stifling a yawn though with the tedium of asking to keep it real. Don’t make stuff up. I’ve never denied any comment , but do feel the need to alert others to stuff twisted or taken out of context.
I know it suits you to put me down as a rabid racist or a right wing fascist when of course I am nothing of the sort. Quite the opposite in fact. A very open minded liberal with a social conscience and a big heart. In fact, my Tanzanian girlfriend is often complaining that I’m too soft!
Blimey, if she thinks your obsession with immigrants and foriegners is too soft. Then she must be properly hardcore.
Or of course, this could all be bullshit.
Actually, most people from abroad that I talk to have a fairly hardline on open or illegal immigration compared to me. An Estonian woman that’s lived here for 20 years, married to an old colleague and friend voted for Brexit can you believe?
Yes. Now you're getting it! Judge people on their character, not on their nationality.
It feels like we've had a breakthrough. Maybe this will be the end of your lazy foreigner bashing rhetoric.
Once again for clarity - I never have and never will judge anyone on their nationality. Or for that matter posted any lazy rhetoric. As I said , although clearly this doesn’t apply to the Fab forum, people can have different views, and it’s ok to agree to disagree.
When you were trying to suggest that Rishi Sunsk wasn’t British you stated ‘Jesus Christ was born in a stables, that doesn’t make him a horse’ , that is lazy rhetoric
No it’s not. People with a sense of humour find stuff like that funny.
Ah, it was a joke, just like the rest of your ‘confused and angry about immigration ‘ material is a joke, I must stop taking you seriously "Oh, just realised it was you that responded on behalf of J2N - are you a team now? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" If not, would you agree it is would stop an asylum seeker from claiming asylum to remain in the UK. Maybe, but it achieves the same aim. Arrive illegally then you are deported unless you claim asylum. If you claim asylum you go to Rwanda, and if your claim is accepted you stay in Rwanda - otherwise deported. You do realise that as part of the deal Rwvada send people back to the UK
Not according to the information I have seen.
I’m afraid it’s true. The whole thing is a disgusting sideshow and will not solve the scandal of tens of thousands (who knows how many?) of illegal immigrants coming to these shores with all of the resulting challenges.
"a portion of the most vulnerable"
So the policy has been sabotaged by the Civil Servants again. Using vague language to undermine it.
And of course Rwanda only agreed to take 1000 initially anyway.
So we need to start the Albania deportation flights ASAP. That returns a significant proportion.
Or just stop worrying about foreigners, stop reading the Daily Mail, or whichever media that's telling you that a small number of immigrants is causing all your problems.
Problem solved.
You mean a ‘large number of illegal unknown immigrants’. Nobody is claiming it’s the cause of all problems. Stop being so disingenuous
I don't get conned by fear mongering media blaming foriegners as a distraction. So I'm not being disingenuous.
But thanks for your concern
But the fear mongering is in your head.
Nope. It's in all the Daily Mail etc and it's in all your threads and posts complaining about foriegners.
You have a strange obsession with a national newspaper and a disingenuous way of exaggerating how things are reported to suit your narrative. I have no problem with ‘foreigners’, that would be odd as there are eight billion of them.
I do have a problem with any mad bad chancers that choose to come to these shores, by illegal means or by bucking the system. As indeed should you. It would be reckless not to, as recent events show.
You appear to be:
A. Suggesting that the Daily Mail doesn't whip up outrage about foriegners.
And
B. Arguing with yourself.
Nothing of the sort. Seek help, or form a higher opinion of the public. They are not as influenced as you by a newspaper.
People are allowed to have and to air a different opinion to you, it’s still allowed to agree to disagree.
You appear to be confused. The only opinion I am offering, is on your posts, and the things you say on here.
I do not need to "seek help". What a ridiculous thing to say.
Anyone on here that likes to administer a severe naked spanking with the Mail, dressed as Maggie Thatcher? Could have a gig for you.
What's this got to do with your confusion over nationality and your constant complaining about foriegners, followed up by denying what you just said?
Is this related to your low quality personal insults?
No confusion and no concern with foreigners. Just stifling a yawn though with the tedium of asking to keep it real. Don’t make stuff up. I’ve never denied any comment , but do feel the need to alert others to stuff twisted or taken out of context.
I know it suits you to put me down as a rabid racist or a right wing fascist when of course I am nothing of the sort. Quite the opposite in fact. A very open minded liberal with a social conscience and a big heart. In fact, my Tanzanian girlfriend is often complaining that I’m too soft!
Blimey, if she thinks your obsession with immigrants and foriegners is too soft. Then she must be properly hardcore.
Or of course, this could all be bullshit.
Actually, most people from abroad that I talk to have a fairly hardline on open or illegal immigration compared to me. An Estonian woman that’s lived here for 20 years, married to an old colleague and friend voted for Brexit can you believe?
Yes. Now you're getting it! Judge people on their character, not on their nationality.
It feels like we've had a breakthrough. Maybe this will be the end of your lazy foreigner bashing rhetoric.
Once again for clarity - I never have and never will judge anyone on their nationality. Or for that matter posted any lazy rhetoric. As I said , although clearly this doesn’t apply to the Fab forum, people can have different views, and it’s ok to agree to disagree.
When you were trying to suggest that Rishi Sunsk wasn’t British you stated ‘Jesus Christ was born in a stables, that doesn’t make him a horse’ , that is lazy rhetoric
No it’s not. People with a sense of humour find stuff like that funny.
Ah, it was a joke, just like the rest of your ‘confused and angry about immigration ‘ material is a joke, I must stop taking you seriously
Oh, just realised it was you that responded on behalf of J2N - are you a team now? "Is this another joke? It’s hard to tell | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" If not, would you agree it is would stop an asylum seeker from claiming asylum to remain in the UK. Maybe, but it achieves the same aim. Arrive illegally then you are deported unless you claim asylum. If you claim asylum you go to Rwanda, and if your claim is accepted you stay in Rwanda - otherwise deported. You do realise that as part of the deal Rwvada send people back to the UK
Not according to the information I have seen.
I’m afraid it’s true. The whole thing is a disgusting sideshow and will not solve the scandal of tens of thousands (who knows how many?) of illegal immigrants coming to these shores with all of the resulting challenges.
"a portion of the most vulnerable"
So the policy has been sabotaged by the Civil Servants again. Using vague language to undermine it.
And of course Rwanda only agreed to take 1000 initially anyway.
So we need to start the Albania deportation flights ASAP. That returns a significant proportion.
Or just stop worrying about foreigners, stop reading the Daily Mail, or whichever media that's telling you that a small number of immigrants is causing all your problems.
Problem solved.
You mean a ‘large number of illegal unknown immigrants’. Nobody is claiming it’s the cause of all problems. Stop being so disingenuous
I don't get conned by fear mongering media blaming foriegners as a distraction. So I'm not being disingenuous.
But thanks for your concern
But the fear mongering is in your head.
Nope. It's in all the Daily Mail etc and it's in all your threads and posts complaining about foriegners.
You have a strange obsession with a national newspaper and a disingenuous way of exaggerating how things are reported to suit your narrative. I have no problem with ‘foreigners’, that would be odd as there are eight billion of them.
I do have a problem with any mad bad chancers that choose to come to these shores, by illegal means or by bucking the system. As indeed should you. It would be reckless not to, as recent events show.
You appear to be:
A. Suggesting that the Daily Mail doesn't whip up outrage about foriegners.
And
B. Arguing with yourself.
Nothing of the sort. Seek help, or form a higher opinion of the public. They are not as influenced as you by a newspaper.
People are allowed to have and to air a different opinion to you, it’s still allowed to agree to disagree.
You appear to be confused. The only opinion I am offering, is on your posts, and the things you say on here.
I do not need to "seek help". What a ridiculous thing to say.
Anyone on here that likes to administer a severe naked spanking with the Mail, dressed as Maggie Thatcher? Could have a gig for you.
What's this got to do with your confusion over nationality and your constant complaining about foriegners, followed up by denying what you just said?
Is this related to your low quality personal insults?
No confusion and no concern with foreigners. Just stifling a yawn though with the tedium of asking to keep it real. Don’t make stuff up. I’ve never denied any comment , but do feel the need to alert others to stuff twisted or taken out of context.
I know it suits you to put me down as a rabid racist or a right wing fascist when of course I am nothing of the sort. Quite the opposite in fact. A very open minded liberal with a social conscience and a big heart. In fact, my Tanzanian girlfriend is often complaining that I’m too soft!
Is she into swinging?
No.
She doesn’t mind you swinging and being on Fab?
Blimey, she’s a girlfriend not a wife. We only meet several times a year and it’s very special indeed. Why spoil that? Although I am getting a bit too old for it all to be honest. As I am with the swinging . Really just here to entertain on the Forum."You are entertaining Seb! I assumed (wrongly) it was a more serious relationship as you brought her up. Never too old though! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" If not, would you agree it is would stop an asylum seeker from claiming asylum to remain in the UK. Maybe, but it achieves the same aim. Arrive illegally then you are deported unless you claim asylum. If you claim asylum you go to Rwanda, and if your claim is accepted you stay in Rwanda - otherwise deported. You do realise that as part of the deal Rwvada send people back to the UK
Not according to the information I have seen.
I’m afraid it’s true. The whole thing is a disgusting sideshow and will not solve the scandal of tens of thousands (who knows how many?) of illegal immigrants coming to these shores with all of the resulting challenges.
"a portion of the most vulnerable"
So the policy has been sabotaged by the Civil Servants again. Using vague language to undermine it.
And of course Rwanda only agreed to take 1000 initially anyway.
So we need to start the Albania deportation flights ASAP. That returns a significant proportion.
Or just stop worrying about foreigners, stop reading the Daily Mail, or whichever media that's telling you that a small number of immigrants is causing all your problems.
Problem solved.
You mean a ‘large number of illegal unknown immigrants’. Nobody is claiming it’s the cause of all problems. Stop being so disingenuous
I don't get conned by fear mongering media blaming foriegners as a distraction. So I'm not being disingenuous.
But thanks for your concern
But the fear mongering is in your head.
Nope. It's in all the Daily Mail etc and it's in all your threads and posts complaining about foriegners.
You have a strange obsession with a national newspaper and a disingenuous way of exaggerating how things are reported to suit your narrative. I have no problem with ‘foreigners’, that would be odd as there are eight billion of them.
I do have a problem with any mad bad chancers that choose to come to these shores, by illegal means or by bucking the system. As indeed should you. It would be reckless not to, as recent events show.
You appear to be:
A. Suggesting that the Daily Mail doesn't whip up outrage about foriegners.
And
B. Arguing with yourself.
Nothing of the sort. Seek help, or form a higher opinion of the public. They are not as influenced as you by a newspaper.
People are allowed to have and to air a different opinion to you, it’s still allowed to agree to disagree.
You appear to be confused. The only opinion I am offering, is on your posts, and the things you say on here.
I do not need to "seek help". What a ridiculous thing to say.
Anyone on here that likes to administer a severe naked spanking with the Mail, dressed as Maggie Thatcher? Could have a gig for you.
What's this got to do with your confusion over nationality and your constant complaining about foriegners, followed up by denying what you just said?
Is this related to your low quality personal insults?
No confusion and no concern with foreigners. Just stifling a yawn though with the tedium of asking to keep it real. Don’t make stuff up. I’ve never denied any comment , but do feel the need to alert others to stuff twisted or taken out of context.
I know it suits you to put me down as a rabid racist or a right wing fascist when of course I am nothing of the sort. Quite the opposite in fact. A very open minded liberal with a social conscience and a big heart. In fact, my Tanzanian girlfriend is often complaining that I’m too soft!
Blimey, if she thinks your obsession with immigrants and foriegners is too soft. Then she must be properly hardcore.
Or of course, this could all be bullshit.
Actually, most people from abroad that I talk to have a fairly hardline on open or illegal immigration compared to me. An Estonian woman that’s lived here for 20 years, married to an old colleague and friend voted for Brexit can you believe?
Yes. Now you're getting it! Judge people on their character, not on their nationality.
It feels like we've had a breakthrough. Maybe this will be the end of your lazy foreigner bashing rhetoric.
Once again for clarity - I never have and never will judge anyone on their nationality. Or for that matter posted any lazy rhetoric. As I said , although clearly this doesn’t apply to the Fab forum, people can have different views, and it’s ok to agree to disagree.
When you were trying to suggest that Rishi Sunsk wasn’t British you stated ‘Jesus Christ was born in a stables, that doesn’t make him a horse’ , that is lazy rhetoric
No it’s not. People with a sense of humour find stuff like that funny.
Ah, it was a joke, just like the rest of your ‘confused and angry about immigration ‘ material is a joke, I must stop taking you seriously
Again, and for clarity. No confusion and no denial. Stop making stuff up. It serves you no good, surely you are better than that?
Another joke? "As sharp as my humour is, a cruel injustice is never the time to joke. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" If not, would you agree it is would stop an asylum seeker from claiming asylum to remain in the UK. Maybe, but it achieves the same aim. Arrive illegally then you are deported unless you claim asylum. If you claim asylum you go to Rwanda, and if your claim is accepted you stay in Rwanda - otherwise deported. You do realise that as part of the deal Rwvada send people back to the UK
Not according to the information I have seen.
I’m afraid it’s true. The whole thing is a disgusting sideshow and will not solve the scandal of tens of thousands (who knows how many?) of illegal immigrants coming to these shores with all of the resulting challenges.
"a portion of the most vulnerable"
So the policy has been sabotaged by the Civil Servants again. Using vague language to undermine it.
And of course Rwanda only agreed to take 1000 initially anyway.
So we need to start the Albania deportation flights ASAP. That returns a significant proportion.
Or just stop worrying about foreigners, stop reading the Daily Mail, or whichever media that's telling you that a small number of immigrants is causing all your problems.
Problem solved.
You mean a ‘large number of illegal unknown immigrants’. Nobody is claiming it’s the cause of all problems. Stop being so disingenuous
I don't get conned by fear mongering media blaming foriegners as a distraction. So I'm not being disingenuous.
But thanks for your concern
But the fear mongering is in your head.
Nope. It's in all the Daily Mail etc and it's in all your threads and posts complaining about foriegners.
You have a strange obsession with a national newspaper and a disingenuous way of exaggerating how things are reported to suit your narrative. I have no problem with ‘foreigners’, that would be odd as there are eight billion of them.
I do have a problem with any mad bad chancers that choose to come to these shores, by illegal means or by bucking the system. As indeed should you. It would be reckless not to, as recent events show.
You appear to be:
A. Suggesting that the Daily Mail doesn't whip up outrage about foriegners.
And
B. Arguing with yourself.
Nothing of the sort. Seek help, or form a higher opinion of the public. They are not as influenced as you by a newspaper.
People are allowed to have and to air a different opinion to you, it’s still allowed to agree to disagree.
You appear to be confused. The only opinion I am offering, is on your posts, and the things you say on here.
I do not need to "seek help". What a ridiculous thing to say.
Anyone on here that likes to administer a severe naked spanking with the Mail, dressed as Maggie Thatcher? Could have a gig for you.
What's this got to do with your confusion over nationality and your constant complaining about foriegners, followed up by denying what you just said?
Is this related to your low quality personal insults?
No confusion and no concern with foreigners. Just stifling a yawn though with the tedium of asking to keep it real. Don’t make stuff up. I’ve never denied any comment , but do feel the need to alert others to stuff twisted or taken out of context.
I know it suits you to put me down as a rabid racist or a right wing fascist when of course I am nothing of the sort. Quite the opposite in fact. A very open minded liberal with a social conscience and a big heart. In fact, my Tanzanian girlfriend is often complaining that I’m too soft!
Blimey, if she thinks your obsession with immigrants and foriegners is too soft. Then she must be properly hardcore.
Or of course, this could all be bullshit.
Actually, most people from abroad that I talk to have a fairly hardline on open or illegal immigration compared to me. An Estonian woman that’s lived here for 20 years, married to an old colleague and friend voted for Brexit can you believe?
Yes. Now you're getting it! Judge people on their character, not on their nationality.
It feels like we've had a breakthrough. Maybe this will be the end of your lazy foreigner bashing rhetoric.
Once again for clarity - I never have and never will judge anyone on their nationality. Or for that matter posted any lazy rhetoric. As I said , although clearly this doesn’t apply to the Fab forum, people can have different views, and it’s ok to agree to disagree.
When you were trying to suggest that Rishi Sunsk wasn’t British you stated ‘Jesus Christ was born in a stables, that doesn’t make him a horse’ , that is lazy rhetoric
No it’s not. People with a sense of humour find stuff like that funny.
Ah, it was a joke, just like the rest of your ‘confused and angry about immigration ‘ material is a joke, I must stop taking you seriously
Again, and for clarity. No confusion and no denial. Stop making stuff up. It serves you no good, surely you are better than that? "A meta denial. Denying all the denying you do. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" If not, would you agree it is would stop an asylum seeker from claiming asylum to remain in the UK. Maybe, but it achieves the same aim. Arrive illegally then you are deported unless you claim asylum. If you claim asylum you go to Rwanda, and if your claim is accepted you stay in Rwanda - otherwise deported. You do realise that as part of the deal Rwvada send people back to the UK
Not according to the information I have seen.
I’m afraid it’s true. The whole thing is a disgusting sideshow and will not solve the scandal of tens of thousands (who knows how many?) of illegal immigrants coming to these shores with all of the resulting challenges.
"a portion of the most vulnerable"
So the policy has been sabotaged by the Civil Servants again. Using vague language to undermine it.
And of course Rwanda only agreed to take 1000 initially anyway.
So we need to start the Albania deportation flights ASAP. That returns a significant proportion.
Or just stop worrying about foreigners, stop reading the Daily Mail, or whichever media that's telling you that a small number of immigrants is causing all your problems.
Problem solved.
You mean a ‘large number of illegal unknown immigrants’. Nobody is claiming it’s the cause of all problems. Stop being so disingenuous
I don't get conned by fear mongering media blaming foriegners as a distraction. So I'm not being disingenuous.
But thanks for your concern
But the fear mongering is in your head.
Nope. It's in all the Daily Mail etc and it's in all your threads and posts complaining about foriegners.
You have a strange obsession with a national newspaper and a disingenuous way of exaggerating how things are reported to suit your narrative. I have no problem with ‘foreigners’, that would be odd as there are eight billion of them.
I do have a problem with any mad bad chancers that choose to come to these shores, by illegal means or by bucking the system. As indeed should you. It would be reckless not to, as recent events show.
You appear to be:
A. Suggesting that the Daily Mail doesn't whip up outrage about foriegners.
And
B. Arguing with yourself.
Nothing of the sort. Seek help, or form a higher opinion of the public. They are not as influenced as you by a newspaper.
People are allowed to have and to air a different opinion to you, it’s still allowed to agree to disagree.
You appear to be confused. The only opinion I am offering, is on your posts, and the things you say on here.
I do not need to "seek help". What a ridiculous thing to say.
Anyone on here that likes to administer a severe naked spanking with the Mail, dressed as Maggie Thatcher? Could have a gig for you.
What's this got to do with your confusion over nationality and your constant complaining about foriegners, followed up by denying what you just said?
Is this related to your low quality personal insults?
No confusion and no concern with foreigners. Just stifling a yawn though with the tedium of asking to keep it real. Don’t make stuff up. I’ve never denied any comment , but do feel the need to alert others to stuff twisted or taken out of context.
I know it suits you to put me down as a rabid racist or a right wing fascist when of course I am nothing of the sort. Quite the opposite in fact. A very open minded liberal with a social conscience and a big heart. In fact, my Tanzanian girlfriend is often complaining that I’m too soft!
Blimey, if she thinks your obsession with immigrants and foriegners is too soft. Then she must be properly hardcore.
Or of course, this could all be bullshit.
Actually, most people from abroad that I talk to have a fairly hardline on open or illegal immigration compared to me. An Estonian woman that’s lived here for 20 years, married to an old colleague and friend voted for Brexit can you believe?
Yes. Now you're getting it! Judge people on their character, not on their nationality.
It feels like we've had a breakthrough. Maybe this will be the end of your lazy foreigner bashing rhetoric.
Once again for clarity - I never have and never will judge anyone on their nationality. Or for that matter posted any lazy rhetoric. As I said , although clearly this doesn’t apply to the Fab forum, people can have different views, and it’s ok to agree to disagree.
When you were trying to suggest that Rishi Sunsk wasn’t British you stated ‘Jesus Christ was born in a stables, that doesn’t make him a horse’ , that is lazy rhetoric
No it’s not. People with a sense of humour find stuff like that funny.
Ah, it was a joke, just like the rest of your ‘confused and angry about immigration ‘ material is a joke, I must stop taking you seriously
Again, and for clarity. No confusion and no denial. Stop making stuff up. It serves you no good, surely you are better than that?
A meta denial.
Denying all the denying you do."I hate this sort of stuff, but here we go - PMSL | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
 | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"CBA to read... Do it conclude Rishi isn't British, I mean commited to being in Britain, because his parents moved here 60 years ago ... And his grandparents moved country before that as well. Lets at least make some assumptions based on his actions, not his parents. And certainly not actions that far back. I still can't fathom how one even gets to writing he's not British, if that's the logic. "What have you posted this? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"CBA to read... Do it conclude Rishi isn't British, I mean commited to being in Britain, because his parents moved here 60 years ago ... And his grandparents moved country before that as well. Lets at least make some assumptions based on his actions, not his parents. And certainly not actions that far back. I still can't fathom how one even gets to writing he's not British, if that's the logic. "Tbh, Seb has admitted he was wrong and in fact he was only joking about Rishi not being British , he is making steady progress | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"CBA to read... Do it conclude Rishi isn't British, I mean commited to being in Britain, because his parents moved here 60 years ago ... And his grandparents moved country before that as well. Lets at least make some assumptions based on his actions, not his parents. And certainly not actions that far back. I still can't fathom how one even gets to writing he's not British, if that's the logic.
Tbh, Seb has admitted he was wrong and in fact he was only joking about Rishi not being British , he is making steady progress "aha. Joke not mistake. I didn't spot that. Fair enough.... That's what emojis are there for !! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"CBA to read... Do it conclude Rishi isn't British, I mean commited to being in Britain, because his parents moved here 60 years ago ... And his grandparents moved country before that as well. Lets at least make some assumptions based on his actions, not his parents. And certainly not actions that far back. I still can't fathom how one even gets to writing he's not British, if that's the logic.
What have you posted this? "I meant ‘why’ | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"CBA to read... Do it conclude Rishi isn't British, I mean commited to being in Britain, because his parents moved here 60 years ago ... And his grandparents moved country before that as well. Lets at least make some assumptions based on his actions, not his parents. And certainly not actions that far back. I still can't fathom how one even gets to writing he's not British, if that's the logic.
Tbh, Seb has admitted he was wrong and in fact he was only joking about Rishi not being British , he is making steady progress "Again you are distorting the truth. It’s clear now, that’s your only tactic in an odd game. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"CBA to read... Do it conclude Rishi isn't British, I mean commited to being in Britain, because his parents moved here 60 years ago ... And his grandparents moved country before that as well. Lets at least make some assumptions based on his actions, not his parents. And certainly not actions that far back. I still can't fathom how one even gets to writing he's not British, if that's the logic.
Tbh, Seb has admitted he was wrong and in fact he was only joking about Rishi not being British , he is making steady progress aha. Joke not mistake. I didn't spot that. Fair enough.... That's what emojis are there for !! "Please don’t be misled. I don’t know why a troll is so obsessed with me. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"CBA to read... Do it conclude Rishi isn't British, I mean commited to being in Britain, because his parents moved here 60 years ago ... And his grandparents moved country before that as well. Lets at least make some assumptions based on his actions, not his parents. And certainly not actions that far back. I still can't fathom how one even gets to writing he's not British, if that's the logic.
Tbh, Seb has admitted he was wrong and in fact he was only joking about Rishi not being British , he is making steady progress aha. Joke not mistake. I didn't spot that. Fair enough.... That's what emojis are there for !!
Please don’t be misled. I don’t know why a troll is so obsessed with me. "so it wasn't a joke ? I'm lost again. I may retire from this thread !  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"CBA to read... Do it conclude Rishi isn't British, I mean commited to being in Britain, because his parents moved here 60 years ago ... And his grandparents moved country before that as well. Lets at least make some assumptions based on his actions, not his parents. And certainly not actions that far back. I still can't fathom how one even gets to writing he's not British, if that's the logic.
Tbh, Seb has admitted he was wrong and in fact he was only joking about Rishi not being British , he is making steady progress
Again you are distorting the truth. It’s clear now, that’s your only tactic in an odd game."Your getting confused again, was your claim that Rishi Sunak isn’t British a joke? or just a mistake? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"CBA to read... Do it conclude Rishi isn't British, I mean commited to being in Britain, because his parents moved here 60 years ago ... And his grandparents moved country before that as well. Lets at least make some assumptions based on his actions, not his parents. And certainly not actions that far back. I still can't fathom how one even gets to writing he's not British, if that's the logic.
Tbh, Seb has admitted he was wrong and in fact he was only joking about Rishi not being British , he is making steady progress
Again you are distorting the truth. It’s clear now, that’s your only tactic in an odd game.
Your getting confused again, was your claim that Rishi Sunak isn’t British a joke? or just a mistake? "you are the one that’s mistaken. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| back to top |  |
