Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
If we do not hit our goal we will be forced to close the site.

Current status: https://keepboardsalive.com/

Annual subs are best for most impact. If you are still undecided on going Ad Free - you can also donate using the Paypal Donate option. All contribution helps. Thank you.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

BoJo banished - Liz Truss down. Is Rishi next for the toaster? **threadbans in OP**

1279280282284285297

Comments

  • Posts: 6,775 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    I'm not adept at the intricacies of UK asylum procedure, though they have an outline on the official government website.

    We know that what is effectively transpiring across the channel is an Albanian expedition.

    This is Asylum Abuse 2022: Albanian Edition. No war zone has been inhabited at any stage of the trek by any of the self-styled refugees coming from Albania. During the first six weeks of summer a leaked intelligence report estimated that almost 40 per cent of Channel migrants were from Albania, a country with a total population of less than 3 million.

    More recently that proportion has at times climbed to well over half. Out of 1,295 Channel migrants arriving on Monday – a record for a single day – at least 700 were reported to be Albanians, overwhelmingly young men.

    Who here is going to argue that this Albanian problem shouldn't be dealt with?

    Instead, Braverman gets attacked because of her parents background and other unfounded allegations of incompetence.



  • Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 17,287 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    No one has any issue whatsoever with a country applying rules and screening processes to review asylum requests etc.

    By all means , review the application and if it's not valid , send the applicant back from whence they came as quickly as you can correctly and legally process them.

    However - When a country says "If you come to our country any other way than flying into an Airport or arriving at a ferry terminal , we are not going to even entertain the possibility that you are a valid asylum seeker , we are going to simply arrest you on the spot and ship you to an African country where you will not be allowed to leave" - That's a major problem.

    Aside from being completely and totally illegal and essentially human traffiking, it's morally reprehensible.

    It's a return to the old style "Transportation" that saw many Irish people end up in indentured servitude in Australia 150 years ago.

    Also - None of the "allegations of incompetence" about Braverman are unfounded , she has proven over and over again that she is utterly out of her depth in whatever position she has been put in.



  • Posts: 5,121 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    To be fair, and factual, when challenged on how someone being bombed in Syria could apply for asylum in the UK without making their way here first (there being no mechanism within Syria for them to do so) your response was “that’s tough”. You were rightly called out on it.

    And in any case it is actually legal to present in the UK and ask immediately for asylum. Despite what the Daily Mail would have you believe. This is the problem that Braverman has, and why any attempt to make it illegal, and to deport people legally requesting asylum, will be held up in the courts for the rest of this parliament before labour consign the Rwanda idea to the bin



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,242 ✭✭✭✭Danzy


    Braverman was an outlier in the libertarian leaning cabinet of Truss, the one Minister that was there to throw a bone to the working class and lower middle class voter.


    He had to have her in job, to show a step away from the loopy libertarian economics and to help the working class some bit.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 74,356 ✭✭✭✭L1011


    Fabricants "hair" seems to be moulting on to his suit, going on PMQs there.



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 43,515 CMod ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    I still think he's a Harry Enfield character. I know he isn't but I still think he is.

    The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God.

    Leviticus 19:34



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,814 ✭✭✭joe40


    Every country has the right to control it's borders. Suella tried to implement a policy of forced repatriation to a foreign country in contravention of international law. That is just incompetence not strong policy.

    I have always had respect for what I would consider the "good people" of the UK (despite the football hooligan types or upper class elitist snobs) and I still hope there are plenty there. But if the tories are not eliminated in the next election then my faith in the UK will be severly dented.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,237 ✭✭✭Floppybits


    When I first saw him I actually thought it was a Harry Enfield comedy sketch. I couldn't believe that this was a real politician. :)



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 43,515 CMod ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    Same here.

    Jokes aside, he's a pretty nasty racist and misogynist even by Tory standards.

    The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God.

    Leviticus 19:34



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,079 ✭✭✭✭Panthro


    Pretty sure he was on First Dates and the date mentioned the mane!



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,031 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr


    "the need to ensure that legitimate migrants enter the UK, legally."


    Care to list the ways someone can apply for asylum without actually entering the UK first?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,693 ✭✭✭A Shaved Duck?


    She lied at every stage of the email scandal.

    Lied about it being a minor document..it was a cabinet document

    Lied about the accidental sending to just her own gmail..it went to multiple recipients that are not cabinet ministers

    Lied about the timeframe she sent the email

    Lied about bringing it to the attention of the cabinet secretary...this did not happen andrew percy went with this to the chief whip.


    Highest standards of responsibility... you are deluded.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,153 ✭✭✭✭Spanish Eyes


    Let them gobble each other up. Sunak has more loot than the King, so he doesn't give a damn personally. Daddy in Law probably pulled a few strings. Infosys isn't it?



  • Posts: 1,877 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    In her resignation letter she said it was an accident, that was a lie. She lied about the time the email was sent. She claimed that as soon as she realised her "mistake" she rapidly reported it on official channels. Again, not true. She lied to Truss in their meeting. Saying that she holds herself to "the highest standards" is somewhat negated by the numerous lies she made in that same statement. Just as Sunak's claim that he will bring “integrity and accountability” as prime minister is negated by bringing Baverman back.



  • Posts: 6,775 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    That's a radical claim to be making about an individual, without a shred of evidence.



  • Posts: 6,775 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    I said no such thing, especially in the confected context you just invented.

    What I said was that it would be "too bad" if, for a given individual, there were no legal channel for them to enter the UK.

    This isn't a controversial view. If I wanted to enter and live in Australia, for example, I would be rightly expected comply with their visa conditions or else I would have no right to enter and live in the country.

    It's the same principle, only for potential asylum seekers.



  • Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 17,287 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    Except applying for Asylum and wanting to emigrate are two entirely different things , but you know that.



  • Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 17,287 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    I also note that Braverman ran out of the chamber a little earlier to avoid being questioned on the specifics of her resignation 6 days ago.

    Accountability and holding herself to higher standards eh??



  • Posts: 6,775 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    The 40% of Albanians crossing the channel are emigrating to the UK.

    And that's the number we know for certain. The actual number of genuine asylum seekers, if they are genuine at all, are vanishingly small.



  • Posts: 5,121 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    oh sorry. You said “too bad “, not “tough”. Clearly a very different sentiment

    anyway, it remains legal 100%l egal to claim asylum while being picked up the channel, and therefore illegal for the UK to deport any asylum seeker before decision on status is made. Confirmed by court of appeal earlier this year. And Braverman wont have enough time to clear clear court challenges in two years

    experts on the radio only this morning, when discussing Braverman’s brief, saying that will not be possible to enact the Rwanda policy (Braverman’s perverse and somewhat disturbing “dream”) during this government

    Its widely considered that Sunak is more than happy to let Braverman continue up that blind alley for the remainder of his government so she doesn’t make any trouble

    Post edited by [Deleted User] on


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 23,692 ✭✭✭✭Akrasia


    Chomsky(2017) on the Republican party

    "Has there ever been an organisation in human history that is dedicated, with such commitment, to the destruction of organised human life on Earth?"



  • Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 17,287 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    So, in order to deal with the Albanians the UK decision is to treat EVERYONE as an illegal immigrant and break international law by traffiking all of them to Rwanda?

    Again you are deliberately ignoring the thrust of the complaints - No one has any issues with the UK wanting to control their borders , it's the manner in which they are choosing to do so that is the problem.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,865 ✭✭✭Brussels Sprout


    I saw some of Prime Minister's Questions earlier. Sunak seemed to be trying to imitate Boris Johnson's style along with the exact same lines.

    That, along with his cabinet picks, seems like he's not bringing anything new to the role, so far.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,649 ✭✭✭✭Loafing Oaf


    Like the ones about 'flag-waving picaninnies' or 'Papua New Guinea-style orgies of cannibalism and chief-killing'? 😜



  • Posts: 6,775 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    You see how the goalposts shift?

    2-years ago, the argument was always "they are almost all refugees" from Syria and Afghanistan etc.

    Now it has been shown that *at least* 40% are from Albania, the goalposts shift to, "Well, we can't discriminate against a tiny minority...".

    It's an infinitely elastic position, but always wrong.

    We need a comprehensive, single approach to the problem that stops all boats from all criminal gangs. If an asylum seeker is willing to pay a criminal gang to enter the UK, I wouldn't grant that person asylum.

    In fact, my policy would be as follows: "If you enter the UK through these means, you shall not be granted asylum under any circumstances".

    If that breaks some international law, then so be it. Better to stop the boats and the drownings than to allow constant debate on the matter, risking more lives in the process.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,031 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr


    "If you enter the UK through these means, you shall not be granted asylum under any circumstances".


    So how do they apply for asylum?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 24,694 ✭✭✭✭Sleepy


    Let's be fair, Britain has quite literally invaded 90% of the world's nations. They don't deserve the right to refuse anyone seeking asylum or immigrant status from their borders legal or not.



  • Posts: 6,775 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Punishing the ordinary population on the basis of what governments and kings did in the past?

    Yeah, that's morally acceptable...

    Collective punishment is considered a crime for a reason.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,210 ✭✭✭✭Leroy42


    But collective treatment of all refugees as illegal is perfectly fine?


    You are right, collective punishment is a crime and the UK is breaking international law.

    If the UK are allowed break whatever law they feel like, on what basis can they condemn any other country? Like Russia for example



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,031 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr


    "Collective punishment is considered a crime for a reason."


    But you want all asylum seekers deported based on the fact the minority are not genuine asylum seekers, that's the epitome of "collective punishment"!


    Care to list the legal ways for people to apply for asylum in the UK?



Advertisement