antony1969 Posted May 10, 2018 Share Posted May 10, 2018 Bulletguy - 2018-05-09 9:19 PM Home Office told of Windrush errors five years ago - Immigration advisers began warning officials of people being wrongly told to leave UK in 2013 After Capita was awarded a Home Office contract in 2012 to help target around 174,000 migrants who had overstayed their visas, pro bono legal advisers said they began to be contacted by older, Caribbean-born individuals concerned that they were receiving text messages and letters advising them to leave the country. The advisers contacted the Home Office to tell them this group had been wrongly targeted. The detail about the warnings given to the Home Office undermines the credibility of briefings the department gave to the media last month, claiming that until mid-April this year officials had been convinced that only a handful of people were affected by the Windrush scandal. Arten Llazari, the RMC’s chief executive, said: “The Capita 2012 contract effectively outsourced part of the creation of the hostile environment to the private sector. In the process many vulnerable citizens, mostly of Caribbean descent, were harassed and repeatedly threatened with deportation. So this outsourcing was done under May's watch as Home Secretary. She's known about this all along......stood by and watched as innocent British citizens were wrenched from their homes, illegally detained in detention centres for deportation.......and did absolutely nothing to put a stop to it. She was chief overseer of ethnic cleansing on a massive scale. She's brought shame and disgrace on this country which will be forever blighted and stained in history by her wickedness. The woman has to go but personally i feel she should be dragged before the ECHR and put on trial for crimes against humanity. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/may/08/home-office-told-of-windrush-errors-five-years-ago-experts-say "Ethnic cleansing on a massive scale" ... "Shame and disgrace on this country which will be forever blighted and stained history by her wickedness" ... This ones the best though "Put on trial for crimes against humanity" ... No stop it I think he actually believes it ... Sleep well princess Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted May 10, 2018 Share Posted May 10, 2018 Bulletguy - 2018-05-09 9:19 PM She's brought shame and disgrace on this country which will be forever blighted and stained in history by her wickedness. The woman has to go but personally i feel she should be dragged before the ECHR and put on trial for crimes against humanity. Pot, kettle, Black.......I think your ex leader Tony Blair is more deserving of that accolade dontcha think? >:-) .......... Oh I forgot.... you dont think (lol) ......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletguy Posted May 10, 2018 Author Share Posted May 10, 2018 pelmetman - 2018-05-10 8:53 AM Bulletguy - 2018-05-09 9:19 PM She's brought shame and disgrace on this country which will be forever blighted and stained in history by her wickedness. The woman has to go but personally i feel she should be dragged before the ECHR and put on trial for crimes against humanity. Pot, kettle, Black.......I think your ex leader Tony Blair is more deserving of that accolade dontcha think? >:-) .......... Oh I forgot.... you dont think (lol) ......... Not more but AS deserving. I certainly agree on that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted May 10, 2018 Share Posted May 10, 2018 Bulletguy - 2018-05-10 2:17 PM pelmetman - 2018-05-10 8:53 AM Bulletguy - 2018-05-09 9:19 PM She's brought shame and disgrace on this country which will be forever blighted and stained in history by her wickedness. The woman has to go but personally i feel she should be dragged before the ECHR and put on trial for crimes against humanity. Pot, kettle, Black.......I think your ex leader Tony Blair is more deserving of that accolade dontcha think? >:-) .......... Oh I forgot.... you dont think (lol) ......... Not more but AS deserving. I certainly agree on that. Really? how many thousand's has Mrs May been indirectly involved in killing? ;-) ......... Prolly a lot less than You or Blair >:-) ......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletguy Posted May 10, 2018 Author Share Posted May 10, 2018 pelmetman - 2018-05-10 2:29 PM Bulletguy - 2018-05-10 2:17 PM pelmetman - 2018-05-10 8:53 AM Bulletguy - 2018-05-09 9:19 PM She's brought shame and disgrace on this country which will be forever blighted and stained in history by her wickedness. The woman has to go but personally i feel she should be dragged before the ECHR and put on trial for crimes against humanity. Pot, kettle, Black.......I think your ex leader Tony Blair is more deserving of that accolade dontcha think? >:-) .......... Oh I forgot.... you dont think (lol) ......... Not more but AS deserving. I certainly agree on that. Really? how many thousand's has Mrs May been indirectly involved in killing? ;-) ......... I suggest you read Article 7 Crimes Against Humanity in the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court sections D, E and K for clarity of definition. You really don't know what you're talking about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted May 10, 2018 Share Posted May 10, 2018 Bulletguy - 2018-05-10 5:14 PM pelmetman - 2018-05-10 2:29 PM Bulletguy - 2018-05-10 2:17 PM pelmetman - 2018-05-10 8:53 AM Bulletguy - 2018-05-09 9:19 PM She's brought shame and disgrace on this country which will be forever blighted and stained in history by her wickedness. The woman has to go but personally i feel she should be dragged before the ECHR and put on trial for crimes against humanity. Pot, kettle, Black.......I think your ex leader Tony Blair is more deserving of that accolade dontcha think? >:-) .......... Oh I forgot.... you dont think (lol) ......... Not more but AS deserving. I certainly agree on that. Really? how many thousand's has Mrs May been indirectly involved in killing? ;-) ......... I suggest you read Article 7 Crimes Against Humanity in the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court sections D, E and K for clarity of definition. You really don't know what you're talking about. I know you had no problem making bullets to kill people ;-) ........ So why the sudden attack of conscience........surely its not Guilt? >:-) ....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletguy Posted May 10, 2018 Author Share Posted May 10, 2018 pelmetman - 2018-05-10 5:26 PM I know you had no problem making bullets to kill people ;-) ........ So why the sudden attack of conscience........surely its not Guilt? >:-) ....... Why don't you read what i told you and learn something for a change instead of spouting rubbish all the time? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted May 10, 2018 Share Posted May 10, 2018 Bulletguy - 2018-05-10 5:52 PM pelmetman - 2018-05-10 5:26 PM I know you had no problem making bullets to kill people ;-) ........ So why the sudden attack of conscience........surely its not Guilt? >:-) ....... Why don't you read what i told you and learn something for a change instead of spouting rubbish all the time? So is it guilt or hypocrisy ? ;-) .......... Just askin?.......my bets on the latter :D ........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletguy Posted May 10, 2018 Author Share Posted May 10, 2018 pelmetman - 2018-05-10 5:54 PM Bulletguy - 2018-05-10 5:52 PM pelmetman - 2018-05-10 5:26 PM I know you had no problem making bullets to kill people ;-) ........ So why the sudden attack of conscience........surely its not Guilt? >:-) ....... Why don't you read what i told you and learn something for a change instead of spouting rubbish all the time? So is it guilt or hypocrisy ? ;-) .......... Just askin?.......my bets on the latter :D ........ Neither. Now you can get back to reading and learning about what i told you instead of deflecting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted May 11, 2018 Share Posted May 11, 2018 Bulletguy - 2018-05-10 7:09 PM pelmetman - 2018-05-10 5:54 PM Bulletguy - 2018-05-10 5:52 PM pelmetman - 2018-05-10 5:26 PM I know you had no problem making bullets to kill people ;-) ........ So why the sudden attack of conscience........surely its not Guilt? >:-) ....... Why don't you read what i told you and learn something for a change instead of spouting rubbish all the time? So is it guilt or hypocrisy ? ;-) .......... Just askin?.......my bets on the latter :D ........ Neither. Now you can get back to reading and learning about what i told you instead of deflecting. Not deflecting just curious as to why someone who had a career in the killing trade has the temerity to criticise May? 8-) ........... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletguy Posted May 11, 2018 Author Share Posted May 11, 2018 pelmetman - 2018-05-11 10:06 AM Bulletguy - 2018-05-10 7:09 PM pelmetman - 2018-05-10 5:54 PM Bulletguy - 2018-05-10 5:52 PM pelmetman - 2018-05-10 5:26 PM I know you had no problem making bullets to kill people ;-) ........ So why the sudden attack of conscience........surely its not Guilt? >:-) ....... Why don't you read what i told you and learn something for a change instead of spouting rubbish all the time? So is it guilt or hypocrisy ? ;-) .......... Just askin?.......my bets on the latter :D ........ Neither. Now you can get back to reading and learning about what i told you instead of deflecting. Not deflecting just curious as to why someone who had a career in the killing trade As explained elsewhere an ammunition round is an inert object. Do you fully understand what that means? What next.....are you going to level such ludicrous accusations against vehicle production workers, cutlery makers, breweries, power supply companies, pharmaceutical manufacturers, agricultural equipment workers etc etc?? ....has the temerity to criticise May? 8-) ........ No 'temerity' needed.....just human empathy and moral decency, something you have shown to be sadly lacking. Criticism of her evil actions and wickedness is justifiably deserved and your inability to state that is shameful and beneath contempt. I am thankful you remain among an extremely tiny minority ostracised by the vast majority of decent society who recognise the deep shame May has brought on the country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletguy Posted May 11, 2018 Author Share Posted May 11, 2018 Yvonne Williams, 59 year old grandmother, twice illegally detained in Yarl's Wood detention centre for removal to Jamaica, STILL having to sign in at the Immigration Enforcement office......a four hour journey involving six buses and two train journeys just to get there, and this she has to do every single month. Disgusting. https://www.channel4.com/news/citizenship-for-all-windrush-children Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Violet1956 Posted May 12, 2018 Share Posted May 12, 2018 Bulletguy - 2018-05-11 9:39 PM Yvonne Williams, 59 year old grandmother, twice illegally detained in Yarl's Wood detention centre for removal to Jamaica, STILL having to sign in at the Immigration Enforcement office......a four hour journey involving six buses and two train journeys just to get there, and this she has to do every single month. Disgusting. https://www.channel4.com/news/citizenship-for-all-windrush-children There’s a lot of missing information in this clip Paul but from the limited information it is not a clear-cut case of unlawful detention/reporting requirements or unlawful removal action. One can understand why children who were born here to Windrush parents, accompanied them when they came, or who joined them here when they were still children should have the same status as their parents. The Home Office statement that the children of the Windrush generation would be eligible for free citizenship may apply to them. However, there seems room for doubt that this lady who entered the UK when she was 41 years of age, some 29 years after her mother left her in Jamaica has a right to British citizenship or a right of abode. I don’t profess to be an expert on Nationality law so I am not saying she has no entitlement I am just pointing out on what I see are potential problems in her case. Here’s a link to a “noddy” explanation of British citizenship I found. https://inews.co.uk/news/uk/windrush-british-citizen-register/ . Veronica Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted May 12, 2018 Share Posted May 12, 2018 Bulletguy - 2018-05-11 8:44 PM No 'temerity' needed.....just human empathy and moral decency, something you have shown to be sadly lacking. Criticism of her evil actions and wickedness is justifiably deserved and your inability to state that is shameful and beneath contempt. I am thankful you remain among an extremely tiny minority ostracised by the vast majority of decent society who recognise the deep shame May has brought on the country. Its quite obvious to everyone your empathy and morals have a left wing bias Bullet *-) ........ I'm thankful that the UK has finally recognised the cobblers you Corbynista's spout.....as it appears we have reached peak Corbyn >:-) ......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted May 12, 2018 Share Posted May 12, 2018 Bulletguy - 2018-05-11 8:44 PM As explained elsewhere an ammunition round is an inert object. Do you fully understand what that means? What next.....are you going to level such ludicrous accusations against vehicle production workers, cutlery makers, breweries, power supply companies, pharmaceutical manufacturers, agricultural equipment workers etc etc?? Bullets are only made for one reason Bullet ;-) .........To kill people or animals :-| .......... Has Mrs May ever had a job where she intentionally made something to kill people or animals?......... No doubt you made those bullets with empathy and moral decency (lol) (lol) (lol) ........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletguy Posted May 12, 2018 Author Share Posted May 12, 2018 Violet1956 - 2018-05-12 8:43 AM Bulletguy - 2018-05-11 9:39 PM Yvonne Williams, 59 year old grandmother, twice illegally detained in Yarl's Wood detention centre for removal to Jamaica, STILL having to sign in at the Immigration Enforcement office......a four hour journey involving six buses and two train journeys just to get there, and this she has to do every single month. Disgusting. https://www.channel4.com/news/citizenship-for-all-windrush-children There’s a lot of missing information in this clip Paul but from the limited information it is not a clear-cut case of unlawful detention/reporting requirements or unlawful removal action. One can understand why children who were born here to Windrush parents, accompanied them when they came, or who joined them here when they were still children should have the same status as their parents. The Home Office statement that the children of the Windrush generation would be eligible for free citizenship may apply to them. However, there seems room for doubt that this lady who entered the UK when she was 41 years of age, some 29 years after her mother left her in Jamaica has a right to British citizenship or a right of abode. I don’t profess to be an expert on Nationality law so I am not saying she has no entitlement I am just pointing out on what I see are potential problems in her case. Here’s a link to a “noddy” explanation of British citizenship I found. https://inews.co.uk/news/uk/windrush-british-citizen-register/ Veronica It's the HO document concerning eligibility which C4 news showed on the clip highlighting the "and children of" bit i felt was key. To me it seems odd pedantry over defining what is a 'child of'. As far as i'm aware it will always be indefinite throughout the persons life. As son/daughter person X is the child of Mr and Mrs Y whatever their age, we just tend not to use the term 'child' once they are beyond 10 or 12 years old for example. I cannot agree with the treatment Mrs Williams has received at all. Forced to make a four hour journey by bus and train every single month to 'sign in' at the Immigration Enforcement office, she is being treated like a criminal, twice locked up in a detention centre and now looks likely to face a third incarceration. If HO believe she entered the country illegally then they should produce the evidence. Where are the charges? When was her trial? The HO have acted like the Gestapo who forcibly removed Jews from Germany (and other countries) prior to and during ww2, the only difference being we've been incarcerating Windrushers in detention centres instead of labour camps or sending them to gas chambers. This bit was interesting your link; To have British citizenship means you can live and work in the UK free of any immigration controls and participate in political life, such as voting in elections. Well i don't know how many Windrushers may have voted in elections (lets face it many British citizens never bother and aren't even interested in voting), but it's documented fact that all those i've linked on this thread spent a life time working, paying NI and taxes, and from memory one lady even worked in HoC canteen at Westminster.......yet not one of them were considered "British citizens" and as we've seen, some were certainly not "free of any immigration controls". Bottom line is the entire debacle over Windrush came about through May's creation of her "hostile environment" during her tenure as HS. The writing was on the wall. There were warnings of future dire consequences but government didn't listen. Rudd was simply the 'fall guy' for May and she is the one under whose watch all this mess began. She must be held to account now. I had high hopes when Javid took office as HS but i'm afraid he fell at the first hurdle by voting to cover up and hide the Windrush documents from the public to save May's skin. That shows you how afraid government are of the full truth coming out.....they voted to conceal it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletguy Posted May 12, 2018 Author Share Posted May 12, 2018 Just received reply from my MP after almost a month....i suppose he's had a lot to deal with over the past few weeks. :-( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted May 12, 2018 Share Posted May 12, 2018 Bulletguy - 2018-05-12 2:28 PM Just received reply from my MP after almost a month....i suppose he's had a lot to deal with over the past few weeks. :-( Questions for Cash? ;-) .........Makes a change (lol) ....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Violet1956 Posted May 12, 2018 Share Posted May 12, 2018 'Fraid it's not pedantry Paul it's just down to a simple application of the law which pedants like me are inclined to follow. We all have a vote and we can change it if we're not happy. This lady entered the UK in 2000 or thereabouts. Jamaicans did not need visas to enter the UK at that time, though they have needed visas since 2003. On arrival at the port/airport they would nevertheless have to state why they were seeking entry. If this lady said she was intending to visit family then she would have been given 6 months leave to enter. If she stayed beyond that six months without claiming that she had another right to stay then the remainder of her stay in the UK was unlawful unless she can show otherwise. If you claim to have a right to remain in the UK the burden is on you to demonstrate that. So far it would seem from the limited information she has not done so. As for the dreadful journey she has to report whilst her status is being considered, well that is down to the reduction in "reporting centres" and the poor availability of alternatives to purely immigration facilities due to cuts in public spending. Yes her journey once a month to report is pretty awful but I'm still not persuaded that she can claim to qualify for British citizenship on the limited facts given in the report. I feel inclined to ask why she has not sought confirmation that she has a right to stay from the Home Office for the entire 17 years she has been here? We have to have border controls and we have to police them. The ugly face of that fact is that otherwise perfectly good people who take their chances and breach those controls will find themselves in a very precarious position. Just think of this alternative scenario - you have family in Jamaica and you decided at the age of 41 that your life would be better if you joined them. When you arrived were given permission to stay for a few months as a visitor because that was the only category in which you stood a chance of being allowed to enter. Instead of leaving you got yourself a nice cash in hand job that enabled you to stay there. Could you really complain if Jamaican immigration caught up with you after 17 years and said sorry mate you have to go because they reached the reasonable conclusion that you lied on entry when you said you were just visiting because it had become clear that you intended to stay forever ? I am concerned that this might be the kind of case that falls into a "me too" category that may not deserve favourable consideration. That won't help those of the Windrush generation who have been truly deprived of the status that was lawfully theirs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted May 12, 2018 Share Posted May 12, 2018 Violet1956 - 2018-05-12 3:48 PM 'Fraid it's not pedantry Paul it's just down to a simple application of the law which pedants like me are inclined to follow. We all have a vote and we can change it if we're not happy. This lady entered the UK in 2000 or thereabouts. Jamaicans did not need visas to enter the UK at that time, though they have needed visas since 2003. On arrival at the port/airport they would nevertheless have to state why they were seeking entry. If this lady said she was intending to visit family then she would have been given 6 months leave to enter. If she stayed beyond that six months without claiming that she had another right to stay then the remainder of her stay in the UK was unlawful unless she can show otherwise. If you claim to have a right to remain in the UK the burden is on you to demonstrate that. So far it would seem from the limited information she has not done so. As for the dreadful journey she has to report whilst her status is being considered, well that is down to the reduction in "reporting centres" and the poor availability of alternatives to purely immigration facilities due to cuts in public spending. Yes her journey once a month to report is pretty awful but I'm still not persuaded that she can claim to qualify for British citizenship on the limited facts given in the report. I feel inclined to ask why she has not sought confirmation that she has a right to stay from the Home Office for the entire 17 years she has been here? We have to have border controls and we have to police them. The ugly face of that fact is that otherwise perfectly good people who take their chances and breach those controls will find themselves in a very precarious position. Just think of this alternative scenario - you have family in Jamaica and you decided at the age of 41 that your life would be better if you joined them. When you arrived were given permission to stay for a few months as a visitor because that was the only category in which you stood a chance of being allowed to enter. Instead of leaving you got yourself a nice cash in hand job that enabled you to stay there. Could you really complain if Jamaican immigration caught up with you after 17 years and said sorry mate you have to go because they reached the reasonable conclusion that you lied on entry when you said you were just visiting because it had become clear that you intended to stay forever ? I am concerned that this might be the kind of case that falls into a "me too" category that may not deserve favourable consideration. That won't help those of the Windrush generation who have been truly deprived of the status that was lawfully theirs. Have you no empathy Veronica??? 8-) ......... That's one of Bullets mole hills into mountains your being pedantic about :-| ......... Signed .... Mr N O Empathy Brexit Terrace South Coast on Sea :D ...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Violet1956 Posted May 12, 2018 Share Posted May 12, 2018 I hope you would agree Dave that there have been some cases in the news reports that appear quite deserving and there are people who have suffered quite badly, to put it mildly, due to the manner in which their attempts to prove they qualified for a right of abode or citizenship have been dealt with. I would be the last to criticise Paul for his genuine concern about the injustice suffered by those people. We have yet to learn quite how many genuine people have been adversely affected. Let’s hope that political expedience does not lead to further injustice by the bending of the rules/law in order to achieve better headlines. :-( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletguy Posted May 12, 2018 Author Share Posted May 12, 2018 Violet1956 - 2018-05-12 3:48 PM 'Fraid it's not pedantry Paul it's just down to a simple application of the law which pedants like me are inclined to follow. We all have a vote and we can change it if we're not happy. This lady entered the UK in 2000 or thereabouts. Jamaicans did not need visas to enter the UK at that time, though they have needed visas since 2003. On arrival at the port/airport they would nevertheless have to state why they were seeking entry. If this lady said she was intending to visit family then she would have been given 6 months leave to enter. If she stayed beyond that six months without claiming that she had another right to stay then the remainder of her stay in the UK was unlawful unless she can show otherwise. If you claim to have a right to remain in the UK the burden is on you to demonstrate that. So far it would seem from the limited information she has not done so. As for the dreadful journey she has to report whilst her status is being considered, well that is down to the reduction in "reporting centres" and the poor availability of alternatives to purely immigration facilities due to cuts in public spending. Yes her journey once a month to report is pretty awful but I'm still not persuaded that she can claim to qualify for British citizenship on the limited facts given in the report. I feel inclined to ask why she has not sought confirmation that she has a right to stay from the Home Office for the entire 17 years she has been here? We have to have border controls and we have to police them. The ugly face of that fact is that otherwise perfectly good people who take their chances and breach those controls will find themselves in a very precarious position. Just think of this alternative scenario - you have family in Jamaica and you decided at the age of 41 that your life would be better if you joined them. When you arrived were given permission to stay for a few months as a visitor because that was the only category in which you stood a chance of being allowed to enter. Instead of leaving you got yourself a nice cash in hand job that enabled you to stay there. Could you really complain if Jamaican immigration caught up with you after 17 years and said sorry mate you have to go because they reached the reasonable conclusion that you lied on entry when you said you were just visiting because it had become clear that you intended to stay forever ? I am concerned that this might be the kind of case that falls into a "me too" category that may not deserve favourable consideration. That won't help those of the Windrush generation who have been truly deprived of the status that was lawfully theirs. Actually when i referred to pedantry i meant in respect of HO officialdom over the 'child of' term.....not you! Yes i agree her case isn't crystal clear though from past examples that wouldn't have made much difference to her citizenship status as Mays Gestapo just come along, drag 'em out of work and sling them into detention centres as "illegals". Even ILR hasn't made any difference. I recall one man actually being told he had ILR, only to later receive notice a few weeks later he was going to be deported! And lets not forget the lad from Shrewsbury threatened with deportation to Uganda of all places when he had lived here all his life! But he was the 'wrong' colour for chucking out so the HO quickly withdrew and apologised. That was during May's tenure as HS and all he gets is an apology fgs!! I expect the reason many didn't seek confirmation of their status is they believed themselves to be citizens of the UK. After all most came from countries which was under British rule and whose head of state was the Queen so even though they came from one island country to another, it was still "British". Apart from May's mad "hostile environment" the problem stems from sub-contracting the work out to Capita, a private company driven by profits.....that's where the 'target' terminology comes in. In short government spout off "we will reduce immigration", get voted in by the racists and xenophobes, job given to HO who think hmm yes we've got too many black faces in UK so lets start with them, we can call it "repatriation" because that sounds nicer than ethnic cleansing and hand the contract over to Capita setting target figures to meet. Capita aren't get enough figures in to reach their 'targets' so take the easy way out and do a blanket cover all by firing off deportation notices to everyone.....that way we should grab a few. This was exactly the same method employed by the CSA and the same used over DLA allowances. A mate of mine received a "you're fit to resume work so no more DLA for you". That he was a stroke victim didn't seem to matter but even more insane.......he'd been fully retired from work for around five years at the time! This is what happens when you sub-contract private companies to do the dirty work and set them mad 'targets'. I'm not surprised Rudd hadn't a clue what was going on in her own department. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted May 12, 2018 Share Posted May 12, 2018 Violet1956 - 2018-05-12 4:19 PM I hope you would agree Dave that there have been some cases in the news reports that appear quite deserving and there are people who have suffered quite badly, to put it mildly, due to the manner in which their attempts to prove they qualified for a right of abode or citizenship have been dealt with. I would be the last to criticise Paul for his genuine concern about the injustice suffered by those people. We have yet to learn quite how many genuine people have been adversely affected. Let’s hope that political expedience does not lead to further injustice by the bending of the rules/law in order to achieve better headlines. :-( As we used to say in the forces Sh*t Happens.....(Prolly not allowed to say it anymore :-|) ........ What I object to is folk like Bullet trying to turn a cock up into political football *-) ....... His so called empathy is as shallow as his agenda >:-) ........ He never had any problems making stuff to kill folk did he? :D ...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletguy Posted May 13, 2018 Author Share Posted May 13, 2018 Born in UK but denied British citizenship...forced to declare as "stateless".....finally gets a passport Jay, whose mother came from Jamaica as a child, has been fighting a constant battle to be recognised as British, spending hundreds of pounds and sending dozens of letters in failed attempts to secure his status. He was forced to declare himself “stateless” after being threatened with deportation by the Home Office in 2016, which he said made him feel embarrassed and “stuck”. A budding musician, Jay was forced to turn down numerous opportunities to go abroad to pursue his singing career because he was unable to travel out of the country. He was also prevented from going on school trips and holidays as a child. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/windrush-immigrant-son-uk-citizenship-passport-granted-jay-a8346696.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted May 14, 2018 Share Posted May 14, 2018 Bulletguy - 2018-05-13 9:43 PM Born in UK but denied British citizenship...forced to declare as "stateless".....finally gets a passport Jay, whose mother came from Jamaica as a child, has been fighting a constant battle to be recognised as British, spending hundreds of pounds and sending dozens of letters in failed attempts to secure his status. He was forced to declare himself “stateless” after being threatened with deportation by the Home Office in 2016, which he said made him feel embarrassed and “stuck”. A budding musician, Jay was forced to turn down numerous opportunities to go abroad to pursue his singing career because he was unable to travel out of the country. He was also prevented from going on school trips and holidays as a child. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/windrush-immigrant-son-uk-citizenship-passport-granted-jay-a8346696.html So is this scandal worse than the grooming of 10,000 kids Bullet?........ You know that scandal where Labour councils turned a blind eye to child rape? :-| ........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.