CurtainRaiser Posted April 14, 2022 Share Posted April 14, 2022 New three word election slogan to appeal to the gammonarte. The Government is prepared to spend £1.4 billion on racism but offers voters a £200 loan for the bills they can’t pay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John52 Posted April 16, 2022 Share Posted April 16, 2022 The UN’s refugee agency has condemned Boris Johnson’s plan to send asylum seekers to Rwanda as “a symbolic gesture” that will be unworkable in practice. Gillian Triggs, the assistant high commissioner at the UNHCR, said the proposed arrangement would only accommodate a few hundred people a year, making it extremely expensive as well as illegal and discriminatory. Rory Stewart said there was a “very strong possibility it’s complete pie in the sky” and had been “rushed out to distract people” from the prime minister being fined by police for attending a party in Downing Street that broke Covid laws. Even the Conservative MP Andrew Mitchell said it was an impractical, immoral and incredibly expensive plan. “The costs are eye-watering,” he told the BBC. “You’re going to send people 6,000 miles into central Africa – it looked when it was discussed in parliament before that it would actually be cheaper to put each asylum seeker in the Ritz hotel in London.” https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/apr/15/un-refugee-agency-condemns-johnsons-rwanda-asylum-plan But I suppose the simple idea of sending immigrants to Rwanda will appeal to people too thick to see what it means in practice. :-S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barryd999 Posted April 16, 2022 Share Posted April 16, 2022 Its just another Brexity fantasy. Designed to distract and get the Gammons into a bit of a chest thumping frenzy and gander votes for the May elections. They will no doubt claim its because of Brexit that they are able to do this. *-) Then when it fails it will be the fault of lefty tree huggers, lefty lawyers and probably what they call "remainers". It cost Australia about £2m a head to do something similar and they only managed to export a couple of hundred or so. Best ignored and say nothing, just watch it fall apart on its own. It wont need any help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletguy Posted April 16, 2022 Share Posted April 16, 2022 UK condemned Rwanda for human rights abuses months before signing deal to send asylum seekers there But now Johnson claims it is, “one of the safest countries in the world”, adding that it is “globally recognised for its record of welcoming and integrating migrants”. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/rwanda-asylum-deal-home-office-uk-b2058273.html However UK will be in breach of international law according to UNHCR.....but then breaking laws is what Johnson and his government specialise in. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-61122241 And guess who just happens to have business connections there? https://opencorporates.com/companies/rw/103277200 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletguy Posted April 16, 2022 Share Posted April 16, 2022 Refugee who fled torture in Rwanda attacks UK asylum deal A refugee who fled torture in Rwanda and was given asylum in the UK has criticised government plans to fly unauthorised migrants to his home country. The 42-year-old journalist told the Guardian that even though he has been granted refugee status here he remains in fear of being targeted by Rwandan government agents in the UK. The man, who lost many family members in the country’s 1994 genocide, decided to become a journalist after he left school in the country’s capital Kigali, because he had concerns about government corruption. He worked for a newspaper which was critical of President Kagame and his government, and was later shut down. He was accused of being an ‘enemy of the state’and was captured trying to flee across the border, blindfolded and tortured for four months. His torturers – who used electric shocks on him – tried to get him to reveal the names of his journalistic sources working for the government, but he refused. He eventually managed to escape to the UK, where he had a mental breakdown. He claimed asylum and after a long legal battle was granted refugee status, with the Home Office accepting his account of what happened to him. https://tinyurl.com/wkwd88j8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted April 16, 2022 Share Posted April 16, 2022 Some questions. My understanding is that those who are to be sent to Rwanda must first have entered the UK. Otherwise, how can they be rounded up and assessed for passage to Rwanda? If that is correct, how will it make, as is being claimed, the prerequisite Channel crossings, still on rubber ducks, any less risky? Once transferred to Rwanda their status will be assessed. My present understanding is that this will be carried out by Rwandan officials, and that the assessment will be for admission to Rwanda, not UK, as asylum seekers/refugees. If they pass, they will be admitted to Rwanda, not UK, and if not, they will presumably be deported from Rwanda. In effect, they will be forcibly (because they will have no choice) transported to a country not of their choosing. Or, more bluntly, it seems they will be kidnapped and trafficked. Am I missing something? Much is made of the claim that they presently enter the UK "illegally". But, once on UK soil, they seem not to resist Immigration officers taking them for assessment. As they are coming as refugees/asylum seekers, what, actually, is illegal? If they'd stowed away on ferries etc, one could argue about the fare dodging, but they have all paid for their (highly risky) passages, so the only "illegality" seems to be their lack of documentation. Are those fleeing hostile countries really obliged to arrive with full legal documentation? Bewildered it is that I am! :-S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletguy Posted April 16, 2022 Share Posted April 16, 2022 Lord Dubs who was a refugee from Czechoslovakia in 1939, has described it as 'state sponsored trafficking'. Patel and Johnson are complicit in committing an illegal act under international law and both should both be behind bars serving a sentence. Their excuse of discouraging the people smugglers is just a cover for making it impossible for foreign folk to enter UK. It's furthering their hostile environment. Look at the disgraceful ,manner in which they've treated Ukrainian refugees as an example where attempts to apply for a visa are thwarted at every turn with even British families offering rooms being frustrated. The centre set up in Lille has no walk in access and doesn't even publicise it's location so quite how refugees are supposed to get there, God only knows.....but thats how hostility works. Oh and all the forms are in English.....not Russian or Ukraine. This website shows the UK Visa rejection rate makes interesting reading with some surprising figures. https://ukvisa.blog/2021/03/15/uk-visa-rejection-rate-2020/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
malc d Posted April 16, 2022 Share Posted April 16, 2022 Brian Kirby - 2022-04-16 7:04 PM Some questions. My understanding is that those who are to be sent to Rwanda must first have entered the UK. Otherwise, how can they be rounded up and assessed for passage to Rwanda? If that is correct, how will it make, as is being claimed, the prerequisite Channel crossings, still on rubber ducks, any less risky? My guess is that Johnsons " world beating master plan " ( that's the only kind of plans he ever has ) is really about deterrence - ( ... and the May elections ). I think that he assumes that when potential Channel crossers see what is likely to happen to them - they will stay in France. i.e. Johnsons problem solved - no more little boats crossing the Channel. What could possibly go wrong ? ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletguy Posted April 16, 2022 Share Posted April 16, 2022 This refugee fled Afghanistan. He's now a qualified doctor working in Radiology and founded a telemedicine charity called Arian Teleheal. The charity enables doctors in conflict zones and low-resource countries to use their smartphones to receive advice from volunteer specialists in the UK, Canada, the US and other countries. His wiki page is a glowing report of personal achievement against the odds. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waheed_Arian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CurtainRaiser Posted April 17, 2022 Author Share Posted April 17, 2022 Bulletguy - 2022-04-16 9:07 PM This refugee fled Afghanistan. He's now a qualified doctor working in Radiology and founded a telemedicine charity called Arian Teleheal. The charity enables doctors in conflict zones and low-resource countries to use their smartphones to receive advice from volunteer specialists in the UK, Canada, the US and other countries. His wiki page is a glowing report of personal achievement against the odds. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waheed_Arian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CurtainRaiser Posted April 17, 2022 Author Share Posted April 17, 2022 There was no new law in Denmark, there was a Memorandum of Understanding signed but no transfers have been made. There was no support from the EU. You need to stop believing what you read in your tribal newsheets Grumblin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John52 Posted April 17, 2022 Share Posted April 17, 2022 Gremlin - 2022-04-17 8:05 AM I don’t like this at all - it does seem inhumane - and the cost projections seem crazy. But one thing did surprise me - Denmark signed up a migrant relocation deal with Rwanda late last year. As well as passing an Act allowing Denmark to relocate illegal migrants outside of the EU whilst their cases were being processed. The EU seemed to have supported this move by Denmark. So what with Australia, the EU - via Denmark, however distasteful we may find the idea - it’s not an original folly of the U.K. Australia, the EU/Denmark have lead the way. Sounds like something you got from the 'newspapers' that were telling us other countries were going to leave the EU *-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletguy Posted April 17, 2022 Share Posted April 17, 2022 Gremlin - 2022-04-17 8:05 AM I don’t like this at all - it does seem inhumane - and the cost projections seem crazy. But one thing did surprise me - Denmark signed up a migrant relocation deal with Rwanda late last year. As well as passing an Act allowing Denmark to relocate illegal migrants outside of the EU whilst their cases were being processed. The EU seemed to have supported this move by Denmark. So what with Australia, the EU - via Denmark, however distasteful we may find the idea - it’s not an original folly of the U.K. Australia, the EU/Denmark have lead the way. Denmarks actions are clearly racially motivated as their immigration authorities have been asked to assess their capacity for taking in Ukrainian refugees.....the same authorities currently stripping Syrian refugees of their residency permits to force them back to Syria, a country still at war with homes reduced to rubble thanks in part to the same Russian forces now responsible for international humanitarian law violations in Ukraine. Denmark has a self-declared zero-asylum policy. Chief among these is the so-called “jewelry law” – a measure which allows the government to seize asylum seekers’ assets, including their jewelry, to fund their stay in the country. The Danish government has clarified that Ukrainian refugees will be exempted from this law. In a reversal that Denmark is not alone in pursuing, the country has justified its open-door policy for Ukrainian refugees because of the proximity of the war and the fact that Ukraine is a “European neighbour.” https://www.hrw.org/news/2022/03/16/denmarks-mismatched-treatment-syrian-and-ukrainian-refugees Neither did it go so well for Israel either who spent a fortune deporting 4,000 Africans to Rwanda as part of a secret deal between 2014 to 2017 - only for nearly every single one of them to escape. Most tried to travel back to Europe, facing brutal people smugglers, ISIS militants and a deadly Mediterranean crossing. The few that remained struggled to survive and get jobs. 'Rwanda is an interesting choice, because this is a country from which people flee,' Dr Peter William Walsh, Senior Researcher at the Migration Observatory, told MailOnline. Only nine of the original refugees from Israel remained in Rwanda as of 2018, the UN found. Israeli newspaper Haaretz managed to track down six of them, and described them all as living a 'meagre existence, struggling to survive'. 'The authorities in Rwanda do not recognize their right to be there and refuse to grant them residency permits,' the newspaper wrote. 'Lacking official documents, they have frequently been arrested and jailed. They are not fluent in the local language, the culture is foreign to them and finding work is nearly impossible.' And surprisingly that article is from the Mail. 8-) https://tinyurl.com/3svytjsc However, Patel is in deep mire.....again. This time for misleading the House over her batty borders bill which contains no safe provision of legal backed routes as she originally told the House. As with Johnson she's a liar and the sooner the country is rid of these shabby 'politicians' the better. There used to be a time when we had a parliament which kicked people like her and Johnson out of office for lying and misleading and it's about time we got back to that. We need to vote this lot out. https://tinyurl.com/wjs4az8d Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CurtainRaiser Posted April 17, 2022 Author Share Posted April 17, 2022 Rather than shipping refugees off to Rwanda, why doesn’t the UK take up France's offer to establish processing centres in France & allow them to apply for asylum there? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John52 Posted April 18, 2022 Share Posted April 18, 2022 CurtainRaiser - 2022-04-17 11:39 PM Rather than shipping refugees off to Rwanda, why doesn’t the UK take up France's offer to establish processing centres in France & allow them to apply for asylum there? Because kidnapping and forcing them off to Rwanda appeals to the worst of human instincts. Red meat for the Brexity types that put the lying charlatan in power, and are too thick to see they have been taken for fools. Probably going down a treat in Wakefield >:-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CurtainRaiser Posted April 18, 2022 Author Share Posted April 18, 2022 Gremlin - 2022-04-17 5:23 PM The original article I read on this was in the Guardian “Denmark passes new law to relocate asylum seekers outside Europe”. The Guardian - 3rd June 2021 The one that states in its opening four paragraphs: "Denmark has passed a law enabling it to process asylum seekers outside Europe, drawing anger from human rights advocates, the UN and European Commission. Politicians in the wealthy Scandinavian nation, which has gained notoriety for its hardline immigration policies over the last decade, passed the law with 70 votes in favour and 24 against. The legislation will complicate the EU’s efforts to overhaul Europe’s fragmented migration and asylum rules, an extremely divisive subject within the bloc. The European Commission (the EU’s executive) questioned the law’s compatibility with Denmark’s international obligations." Which seems to contradict your interpretation, can't think why: "But one thing did surprise me - Denmark signed up a migrant relocation deal with Rwanda late last year. As well as passing an Act allowing Denmark to relocate illegal migrants outside of the EU whilst their cases were being processed. The EU seemed to have supported this move by Denmark." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CurtainRaiser Posted April 18, 2022 Author Share Posted April 18, 2022 Gremlin - 2022-04-18 8:10 AM CurtainRaiser - 2022-04-18 7:38 AM Gremlin - 2022-04-17 5:23 PM The original article I read on this was in the Guardian “Denmark passes new law to relocate asylum seekers outside Europe”. The Guardian - 3rd June 2021 The one that states in its opening four paragraphs: "Denmark has passed a law enabling it to process asylum seekers outside Europe, drawing anger from human rights advocates, the UN and European Commission. Politicians in the wealthy Scandinavian nation, which has gained notoriety for its hardline immigration policies over the last decade, passed the law with 70 votes in favour and 24 against. The legislation will complicate the EU’s efforts to overhaul Europe’s fragmented migration and asylum rules, an extremely divisive subject within the bloc. The European Commission (the EU’s executive) questioned the law’s compatibility with Denmark’s international obligations." Which seems to contradict your interpretation, can't think why: "But one thing did surprise me - Denmark signed up a migrant relocation deal with Rwanda late last year. As well as passing an Act allowing Denmark to relocate illegal migrants outside of the EU whilst their cases were being processed. The EU seemed to have supported this move by Denmark." You might want to read my other posts - and the Guardian article on what the EU was up to. Like all political machinations - the EU says one thing and does another. And, of course, it’s not alone - “The Tribe” on here jumps to the immediate conclusion that only the U.K. could possibly come up with such a plan!! When the reality is - the EU has gone down this road before, Kept quite about it - lied about it - contradicted itself - and those with their noses firmly inserted in the bottom of the EU turn off their senses and act as the usual “useful idiots”. Situation normal then….. Five years ago the EU consideration was on the front page of the paper, they obviously weren't very good at keeping quiet about it. I also note that the purpose EU proposal was to distinguish between economic migrants and those in need of international protection, genuine asylum seekers being granted access, not left to start a new life in Rwanda. I note also that "According to the draft document, the EU would like to set up the centres in collaboration with the UN refugee agency and the International Organization for Migration, a UN-related body that has previously criticised the paucity of legal routes for African migrants to travel to Europe." One of the major criticisms of the current UK strategy is that they have closed down all options to apply for asylum in the UK, for example on the basis of family connections here, unless you are in the UK. When people then try to enter the UK to submit their claims the UK government calls them illegal. Seventy percent of those "illegals" are then deemed to be genuine asylum seekers and granted leave to remain. If the government wanted to shut down the people smuggler gangs they would accept the French government offer and set up a processing centre at Calais. But that wouldn't go down well with the Gammon like yourself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CurtainRaiser Posted April 18, 2022 Author Share Posted April 18, 2022 Gremlin - 2022-04-18 9:23 AM I think you have a little bit of something brown and smelly on the end of your nose dear boy…. I always know when I’m “right on target” - you get belligerent. I always know when you have lost the argument - when you no longer put any facts forward as a counter argument and resort to personal insults. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CurtainRaiser Posted April 18, 2022 Author Share Posted April 18, 2022 Gremlin - 2022-04-18 8:10 AM And, of course, it’s not alone - “The Tribe” on here jumps to the immediate conclusion that only the U.K. could possibly come up with such a plan!! When the reality is - the EU has gone down this road before, Kept quite about it - lied about it - contradicted itself - and those with their noses firmly inserted in the bottom of the EU turn off their senses and act as the usual “useful idiots”. Situation normal then….. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CurtainRaiser Posted April 18, 2022 Author Share Posted April 18, 2022 Grumblin, you throw insults around, including homophobic comments, albeit not very original or even humorous ones. But as soon as you are called out you adopt the moral high ground, but you're building on very weak foundations. Take the Bloomberg thread, Brain addressed all your points in detail and with courtesy, your response is to accuse him of spin and twist, it's clear to everyone reading the thread that you have lost the argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CurtainRaiser Posted April 18, 2022 Author Share Posted April 18, 2022 Is ‘Shirtlifter’ homophobic or just stupid? / Wikitionary the free dictionary https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/shirt_lifter Interesting little article - the summary at the end is interesting especially the last sentence:- "(Britain, slang) Synonym of bottom: a homosexual man who is penetrated or prefers to be penetrated during anal sex." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletguy Posted April 18, 2022 Share Posted April 18, 2022 Gremlin - 2022-04-18 7:12 AM CurtainRaiser - 2022-04-17 11:39 PM Rather than shipping refugees off to Rwanda, why doesn’t the UK take up France's offer to establish processing centres in France & allow them to apply for asylum there? I understood the U.K. had paid France £54million to do just that via reception centres the U.K. paid for but the French system seems to simply release the migrants rather than “process and relocate”. The agreements were supposed to facilitate the transport the migrants away from the coastal areas to these centres where they could apply for asylum in the EU. The French residents of northern coastal areas where the unofficial migrant camps exist are as keen as anyones for the politicians to get the mess sorted out. And it is a mess. The EU laws are quite clear in that migrants are supposed to be dealt with by the first country within the EU that the migrant arrives at. On the 26th July 2017 the Court of Justice of the EU confirmed that The Dublin III Regulation continues to apply - i.e. the first EU country that a refugee enters is responsible for examining their application for International Protection. UK reached an agreement with France to fund extra patrols but never paid them a single euro. https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/france-dover-border-force-priti-patel-french-b959704.html UK could open proper processing centres in France for migrants, just as they have done for Ukrainian refugees, but they won't so the smugglers will continue to profit. Refugees and/or asylum seekers can seek asylum in whichever country they choose. https://tinyurl.com/3e6ys6b4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CurtainRaiser Posted April 18, 2022 Author Share Posted April 18, 2022 Anybody want to guess which British Cabinet Minister's old school friend just purchased, via a Cayman Islands shell company, a large tract of land in Rwanda near to the airport ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.