More Tory lies

[Space Mackerel]

1 hour ago, jack D and coke said:

Don’t waste your time mate he’s more interested in anything the SNP do and battering away at that and getting his jimmys wet.

Turns a blind eye to absolutely everything the uk government does however. 

 

I know pal, I shouldn’t really but stupid and ignorant does my head in on here. 

[Space Mackerel]

18 minutes ago, Seymour M Hersh said:

 

Owen Jones takes complete fuddery to new levels. He's a complete welt.

 

Shame hes 1000% right though eh? 

[Victorian]

May insists it has always been right to tackle illegal immigration and that people expect this to continue...

 

 

Aye.    Maybe if you had actually done this then,    instead of persecuting British citizens who are here legally.    

 

Arsehole.

[shaun.lawson]

1 hour ago, The Comedian said:

Doesn't taking a No Deal option off the table significantly weaken our negotiating position.

 

I guess that's the point. You just aren't allowed to leave the EU.

 

It's not the point at all. Every member state is allowed to leave the EU if they wish. But doing so requires honesty with the public about what this will involve. 

 

The Tories, by contrast, can't even be honest with themselves about that, let alone with the people. 

[shaun.lawson]

1 hour ago, Seymour M Hersh said:

 

Please enlighten me as to these "stupid demands"?

 

No point, because you can't handle detail. You prove that on here every day. 

 

Jones is, incidentally, quite right. Amber Rudd has two offshore accounts in the Bahamas; censors her political opponents by not allowing them to speak at electoral hustings; carried out May's disgusting policies to the letter; and lied about it to Parliament. **** her. 

[Space Mackerel]

2 minutes ago, shaun.lawson said:

 

It's not the point at all. Every member state is allowed to leave the EU if they wish. But doing so requires honesty with the public about what this will involve. 

 

The Tories, by contrast, can't even be honest with themselves about that, let alone with the people. 

 

I think it’s called “policy on the hoof”

[Ulysses]

2 hours ago, maroonlegions said:

 

 

They are all the same to me mate.

 

 

You'll just keep celebrating while bad Tories get replaced by worse Tories?

 

Fair enough. 

[jambo lodge]

16 minutes ago, Ulysses said:

 

You'll just keep celebrating while bad Tories get replaced by worse Tories?

 

Fair enough. 

Dear Oh dear , what a bunch of people with a victim mentality on this site. 

[Ulysses]

15 minutes ago, jambo lodge said:

Dear Oh dear , what a bunch of people with a victim mentality on this site. 

 

It seems to be the way of the "hard left".  Perhaps if we get worse Tories then the revolution will start sooner. 

[Space Mackerel]

16 minutes ago, jambo lodge said:

Dear Oh dear , what a bunch of people with a victim mentality on this site. 

 

Youve been greeting about the SNP on here for years!  

[jake]

30 minutes ago, Ulysses said:

 

It seems to be the way of the "hard left".  Perhaps if we get worse Tories then the revolution will start sooner. 

What's even funnier is a bash the Tory thread.

It's just so predictable.

[The Mighty Thor]

6 minutes ago, jake said:

What's even funnier is a bash the Tory thread.

It's just so predictable.

No need to bash the Tories.

Leave them long enough and they fight like rats in a sack.

Brexit is bringing them to the vinegars on both sides of the argument which will mean a good bit of lord of the flies type action in the coming months 

 

 

[Space Mackerel]

7 minutes ago, jake said:

What's even funnier is a bash the Tory thread.

It's just so predictable.

 

The actual Tory’s, the real ones, in real life can’t defend themselves, then, you get the zoomers on here trying to do it for them.

 

Now that’s funny :-D

[jack D and coke]

What exactly is wrong with these people? 

How can any Scottish person actually vote for this? 

 

[deesidejambo]

1 minute ago, jack D and coke said:

What exactly is wrong with these people? 

How can any Scottish person actually vote for this? 

 

Reservoir Dogs fans maybe?

[Boris]

12 hours ago, Ulysses said:

 

It seems to be the way of the "hard left".  Perhaps if we get worse Tories then the revolution will start sooner. 

 

I wouldn't say the revolution, but as they, the Tories, are shown up for what they are it may just lead to a recalibration of the political landscape, leading to perhaps a better (IMO of course!) government.

[Boris]

2 minutes ago, Lord BJ said:

 

Im not sure the way someone stands should really effect anyone’s voting intention. Not like it has any impact on anything. If anyone’s take that attitude bigger wankers than in pics.

 

As an aside most top politicians, high levels business people, comms etc are generally all educated in body language and message it conveys. Messages are 80% non verbal so how you say something is way more important than what you say. I personally have been through a bit of training it’s not than unusual.

 

The problem is body language is difficult to fake. As it’s a combination of actions not one thing. They’re just not very good at faking body language however the pics positioning also does no favours.

 

 

 

They are like the actors in Blackadder three.

 

Edited May 1, 2018 by Boris

[The Real Maroonblood]

37 minutes ago, jack D and coke said:

What exactly is wrong with these people? 

How can any Scottish person actually vote for this? 

 

The parting of the hairs stance.

[deesidejambo]

18 minutes ago, Lord BJ said:

 

Im not sure the way someone stands should really effect anyone’s voting intention. Not like it has any impact on anything. If anyone’s take that attitude bigger wankers than in pics.

 

As an aside most top politicians, high levels business people, comms etc are generally all educated in body language and message it conveys. Messages are 80% non verbal so how you say something is way more important than what you say. I personally have been through a bit of training it’s not than unusual.

 

The problem is body language is difficult to fake. As it’s a combination of actions not one thing. They’re just not very good at faking body language however the pics positioning also does no favours.

 

 

Body language is far more important than given credit for.     But it is easy to fake by well-trained peeps, as I expect many politicians are.

 

But this picture is perfect material for a Masters in psychology, or even anthropology.

 

First the blokes - a wide open stance is often read as "strength" i.e. strong foundations (the legs) supporting a powerful individual.   That is what the Tories intend here.  But as this thread demonstrates it can also be read as "challenge"  i.e ""come on ahead".   Tribal war dances are often done in this manner - males challenging other males by showing their genitals unprotected as an invite to come and fight.    In the modern world this fight is done here on this forum and in the media in general.

 

Choice of the above depends on which tribe you belong to - Tories will see this very same posture as a position of strength, whilst non-Tories will be aggravated into responding, as has happened here.

 

But May is a different message altogether - she will have been told to stand in this male posture as a quasi-Thatcher position of "Im just as strong as a man".      Female Tories will love this.    But response of males of all political persuasions, even Tories, will be different - it is a sexual pose again exposing genitals to view.      And the result of this will be quite unanimous across all males - boak.

 

As an aside, showing of genitals is most common in dancing - which is nothing more than a mating ritual.  People never dance alone in the house  - always in public and (with some exceptions) with members of the opposite sex.    Beware next time you try and dance with someone else wife.

 

And for those who will say  - well women often dance together so Im bullshitting - no - the reason women dance together is again in public, never in private, and its to attract members of the opposite sex into their group.  The urge gets so strong that they will even do this if no males around.          So if you see a bunch of women dancing together and you join them -make sure you are not to pashed.   And do Dad-dancing, which does not involve pelvic thrusts.

 

 

 

 

[Boris]

17 minutes ago, Lord BJ said:

 

They may very well be. However, making at issue of something like how people stand doesn’t really seem like justifiable criticism. Its not like people don’t have enough to take fire on, yet choose the way some stands kind of missing the point and largely diminishes justifiable criticism as it comes across more a prejudice than a critique. 

 

Political commebtary by those of linited intelligence imo. Up there with people posting pictures of jimmy crankie, Corbin with Russian hand on.

 

I note your post you hope this may lead to a ‘revolution’ I think this will change nothing. It will blow over in a few weeks and everyone will be back to brexit.

 

The problem with people who get worked up about these scandals are generally the people who want rid so get excited their wish might come true. However, back in real world people are like that’s terrible and get sorted. However, the shouting and screaming turns a lot of people off as they’re just not in politics and the hyperbole that surrounds it. 

 

Look, I agree it seems churlish to knock someone because of their literal stance.  But if someone looks a bit odd, or silly, people will say so.  Also agree with you regards Jimmy Crankie, russian Hats etc

 

No, I didn't say I hoped this led to revolution, I think you may have misread me. 

 

I was merely saying that this scandal has really highlighted what a hostile environment (pun intended) Britain appears to have become.  As the political narrative has gone to the right, perhaps this is a wake up call for politics to recalibrate itself with the centre actually being the centre and not centre-right.

 

Or perhaps we can have a more compassionate political narrative?

 

This government's coat is on a shaky peg, or rather the PM's is.  If she falls, what next?

[Boris]

2 minutes ago, deesidejambo said:

People never dance alone in the house

 

I do sometimes....

[AlimOzturk]

I hate to he Tories.  

 

Wish we voted for independence but the Scottish people would rather see Lying *******s like Cameron, May, Rudd and Javid rule over us. 

 

Say what you want about Surgeon but she and the SNP at least have their shit together and stand by their party. The only strong and stable government about. 

[deesidejambo]

15 minutes ago, Lord BJ said:

Way off topic but I often dance in the house alone lol.

Give Boris a call!

 

Seriously though.    You may dance alone in the house but not the same way you would if you were dancing with a female - especially an attractive one, with big tits.

 

But if you do - shut the curtains!

[Boris]

5 minutes ago, deesidejambo said:

You may dance alone in the house but not the same way you would if you were dancing with a female - especially an attractive one, with big tits.

 

 

Deeside, in for the kill...

[deesidejambo]

1 minute ago, Lord BJ said:

 

I dont think boris is my type. Particularly as I always think he is the guy in the avatar!!! 

 

 

Right Boris - change your avatar to George Clooney and you're in there.

[jambo lodge]

14 hours ago, Ulysses said:

 

It seems to be the way of the "hard left".  Perhaps if we get worse Tories then the revolution will start sooner. 

So the appointment of Sajid David is a  "worse Tory ", whatever that may be. The said minister had a glittering career as a banker with Deutsche Bank where he earned £3m per year and paid tax on it. He then resigned to enter politics with a fraction of the salary to which he was accustomed. His appointment yesterday as Home Secretary was/is greeted warmly by most political commentators, except the far left who will never be in power in this country and don't have a clue what serving their country really means.   

[maroonlegions]

15 hours ago, Ulysses said:

 

You'll just keep celebrating while bad Tories get replaced by worse Tories?

 

Fair enough. 

 

I will repeat, UNTIL they are VOTED out ,then i will celebrate. Nothing wrong in laughing my c**** off at everyone one of them that bits the dust until then.

 

 

[Boris]

18 minutes ago, Lord BJ said:

 

I dont think boris is my type. Particularly as I always think he is the guy in the avatar!!! 

 

 

 

 

16 minutes ago, deesidejambo said:

Right Boris - change your avatar to George Clooney and you're in there.

 

Nyet.  Sorry LBJ!

 

[maroonlegions]

9 minutes ago, jambo lodge said:

So the appointment of Sajid David is a  "worse Tory ", whatever that may be. The said minister had a glittering career as a banker with Deutsche Bank where he earned £3m per year and paid tax on it. He then resigned to enter politics with a fraction of the salary to which he was accustomed. His appointment yesterday as Home Secretary was/is greeted warmly by most political commentators, except the far left who will never be in power in this country and don't have a clue what serving their country really means.   

He is a liar.

 

He was asked a question in the Commons yesterday by Diane Abbot   if the government had removed a key protection from British residents of the Windrush generation , he said NO.

 

HE was lying, barely ten mins into his commons seat and he lied.

 

Serving ones country does not include lying and protecting those that have lied in the past and continue to do so in order to save their own coweredly skins.

 

The Selfservatives are just that, protect their own and themselves at all costs ,and that includes lying like Rudd and Sajid.

 

Now does the following case below ,which was reported in the Guardian in 2014,put the present government, (May was then home secretary in 2014 when this protection was willfully and knowingly removed), in a position of as you said , " having a clue of what serving this country ,means????

 

 

"The government quietly removed a key protection from the statute books for some British residents of the Windrush generation who could face deportation, the Guardian has learned.

 

The Home Office said the clause was not included in the 2014 Immigration Act because adequate protections were already in place for people who were initially granted temporary rights to remain in the UK and have stayed for decades.

 

The Labour party, lawyers and charities are urging the government to reinstate the clause to ensure all longstanding Commonwealth residents are protected from enforced removal, not just those who have gained “settled” status.

 

 

The Guardian has revealed many cases of Commonwealth citizens who have lived, worked and paid taxes in the UK for decades but have recently been threatened with removal. They have struggled to provide the paperwork required by the Home Office to prove they have the legal right to remain in the UK.

 

Diplomats from 12 Caribbean countries have called on the Home Office to resolve the situation.

 

The onus is on individuals to prove they were resident in the UK before 1 January 1973, the date the 1971 Immigration Act came into force. However, a key clause from 1999 legislation, which had provided longstanding Commonwealth residents with protection from enforced removal, was deleted from the 2014 Immigration Act. The government did not announce the removal of this clause, nor did it consult on the potential ramifications.

 

 

All longstanding Commonwealth residents were protected from enforced removal by a specific exemption in the 1999 Immigration and Asylum Act – a clause removed in the updated 2014 legislation.

 

 

Frances Webber, a former barrister and vice-chair of the Institute of Race Relations, discovered the deletion of the clause. “I find it very frightening that rights can be removed in this way, surreptitiously, with no debate,” she said.

 

 

“It is particularly cruel that the people secretly stripped of these rights will by definition have lived here for getting on for half a century. The inhumanity of it, and the disregard for democracy, are breathtaking. The deletion of the exemption was clearly deliberate … There is a gap in the protection for long-resident Commonwealth citizens, which needs to be filled.”

 

 

Diane Abbott, the shadow home secretary, criticised the removal of the clause without parliamentary debate or announcement and urged the government to rethink it. “We want the legal protections that were previously given to be upheld,” she said. “It would be a small matter to alter the law. But it would mean a great deal to those affected, and enhance this country’s reputation for fair dealing and keeping its word.”

 

Satbir Singh, the chief executive of the Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants, said: “This is yet another example of the government reneging on its commitments to the Commonwealth. It would be simple to correct this oversight, and the government needs to act immediately to do so. Our rights should never be removed in secret or by accident.”

 

 

They are a nasty bunch of liars and very shallow people, self interests to the core, a new rat has taken over.

 

[Seymour M Hersh]

23 minutes ago, maroonlegions said:

He is a liar.

 

He was asked a question in the Commons yesterday by Diane Abbot   if the government had removed a key protection from British residents of the Windrush generation , he said NO.

 

HE was lying, barely ten mins into his commons seat and he lied.

 

Serving ones country does not include lying and protecting those that have lied in the past and continue to do so in order to save their own coweredly skins.

 

The Selfservatives are just that, protect their own and themselves at all costs ,and that includes lying like Rudd and Sajid.

 

Now does the following case below ,which was reported in the Guardian in 2014,put the present government, (May was then home secretary in 2014 when this protection was willfully and knowingly removed), in a position of as you said , " having a clue of what serving this country ,means????

 

 

"The government quietly removed a key protection from the statute books for some British residents of the Windrush generation who could face deportation, the Guardian has learned.

 

The Home Office said the clause was not included in the 2014 Immigration Act because adequate protections were already in place for people who were initially granted temporary rights to remain in the UK and have stayed for decades.

 

The Labour party, lawyers and charities are urging the government to reinstate the clause to ensure all longstanding Commonwealth residents are protected from enforced removal, not just those who have gained “settled” status.

 

 

The Guardian has revealed many cases of Commonwealth citizens who have lived, worked and paid taxes in the UK for decades but have recently been threatened with removal. They have struggled to provide the paperwork required by the Home Office to prove they have the legal right to remain in the UK.

 

Diplomats from 12 Caribbean countries have called on the Home Office to resolve the situation.

 

The onus is on individuals to prove they were resident in the UK before 1 January 1973, the date the 1971 Immigration Act came into force. However, a key clause from 1999 legislation, which had provided longstanding Commonwealth residents with protection from enforced removal, was deleted from the 2014 Immigration Act. The government did not announce the removal of this clause, nor did it consult on the potential ramifications.

 

 

All longstanding Commonwealth residents were protected from enforced removal by a specific exemption in the 1999 Immigration and Asylum Act – a clause removed in the updated 2014 legislation.

 

 

Frances Webber, a former barrister and vice-chair of the Institute of Race Relations, discovered the deletion of the clause. “I find it very frightening that rights can be removed in this way, surreptitiously, with no debate,” she said.

 

 

“It is particularly cruel that the people secretly stripped of these rights will by definition have lived here for getting on for half a century. The inhumanity of it, and the disregard for democracy, are breathtaking. The deletion of the exemption was clearly deliberate … There is a gap in the protection for long-resident Commonwealth citizens, which needs to be filled.”

 

 

Diane Abbott, the shadow home secretary, criticised the removal of the clause without parliamentary debate or announcement and urged the government to rethink it. “We want the legal protections that were previously given to be upheld,” she said. “It would be a small matter to alter the law. But it would mean a great deal to those affected, and enhance this country’s reputation for fair dealing and keeping its word.”

 

Satbir Singh, the chief executive of the Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants, said: “This is yet another example of the government reneging on its commitments to the Commonwealth. It would be simple to correct this oversight, and the government needs to act immediately to do so. Our rights should never be removed in secret or by accident.”

 

 

They are a nasty bunch of liars and very shallow people, self interests to the core, a new rat has taken over.

 

 

I wonder what Diane Abacus would do with the up to 1 million illegal immigrants we have in the UK? We may never know as she dodged that question 6 times when asked on TV.

[Cade]

Illegal immigrants should be deported. Nobody is arguing that point.

 

The fact is that the governments "hostile environment" policy is also resulting in LEGAL migrants also being deported.

 

The Home Office is in a complete shambles.

[robbo1874]

7 minutes ago, Cade said:

Illegal immigrants should be deported. Nobody is arguing that point.

 

The fact is that the governments "hostile environment" policy is also resulting in LEGAL migrants also being deported.

 

The Home Office is in a complete shambles.

They're not even legal migrants. They're British full stop. 

Agreed total shambles though and that falls at May's door. 

 

[Boris]

1 hour ago, Seymour M Hersh said:

 

I wonder what Diane Abacus would do with the up to 1 million illegal immigrants we have in the UK? We may never know as she dodged that question 6 times when asked on TV.

 

How do you know there are up to 1 million illegal immigrants?

 

If they are illegal, how do we know they are here?

[Ulysses]

2 hours ago, jambo lodge said:

So the appointment of Sajid David is a  "worse Tory ", whatever that may be. The said minister had a glittering career as a banker with Deutsche Bank where he earned £3m per year and paid tax on it. He then resigned to enter politics with a fraction of the salary to which he was accustomed. His appointment yesterday as Home Secretary was/is greeted warmly by most political commentators, except the far left who will never be in power in this country and don't have a clue what serving their country really means.   

 

 

You need to read my post again.  I was poking fun at the naive view of the "hard left".

 

Also, if you read the exchange between myself and maroonlegions again, you'll note that the contrast wasn't between Rudd and Javid; it was between May and Gove.  Or May and Johnson.  Or May and Hunt.  Or May and Rees-Mogg.

[maroonlegions]

 

Lets not forget another wee niggling and annoying fact for those trying to make out that our new home secretary is in any way a caring and fair individual.

 

He voted to allow deportations BEFORE  considering appeals on human rights grounds.

 

The  past can  often  come back to haunt one as Rudd found out, feck all in the MSM though.

 

This is the man who is now the new home secretary.

 

[maroonlegions]

15 minutes ago, Boris said:

 

How do you know there are up to 1 million illegal immigrants?

 

If they are illegal, how do we know they are here?

Facts and figures plucked out the air by a desperate corrupt,lying  and dying government.

 

May had a big hand in the brutally unfair  Windrush scandal, she was the HS in 2014.

 

[jambo lodge]

2 hours ago, maroonlegions said:

He is a liar.

 

He was asked a question in the Commons yesterday by Diane Abbot   if the government had removed a key protection from British residents of the Windrush generation , he said NO.

 

HE was lying, barely ten mins into his commons seat and he lied.

 

Serving ones country does not include lying and protecting those that have lied in the past and continue to do so in order to save their own coweredly skins.

 

The Selfservatives are just that, protect their own and themselves at all costs ,and that includes lying like Rudd and Sajid.

 

Now does the following case below ,which was reported in the Guardian in 2014,put the present government, (May was then home secretary in 2014 when this protection was willfully and knowingly removed), in a position of as you said , " having a clue of what serving this country ,means????

 

 

"The government quietly removed a key protection from the statute books for some British residents of the Windrush generation who could face deportation, the Guardian has learned.

 

The Home Office said the clause was not included in the 2014 Immigration Act because adequate protections were already in place for people who were initially granted temporary rights to remain in the UK and have stayed for decades.

 

The Labour party, lawyers and charities are urging the government to reinstate the clause to ensure all longstanding Commonwealth residents are protected from enforced removal, not just those who have gained “settled” status.

 

 

The Guardian has revealed many cases of Commonwealth citizens who have lived, worked and paid taxes in the UK for decades but have recently been threatened with removal. They have struggled to provide the paperwork required by the Home Office to prove they have the legal right to remain in the UK.

 

Diplomats from 12 Caribbean countries have called on the Home Office to resolve the situation.

 

The onus is on individuals to prove they were resident in the UK before 1 January 1973, the date the 1971 Immigration Act came into force. However, a key clause from 1999 legislation, which had provided longstanding Commonwealth residents with protection from enforced removal, was deleted from the 2014 Immigration Act. The government did not announce the removal of this clause, nor did it consult on the potential ramifications.

 

 

All longstanding Commonwealth residents were protected from enforced removal by a specific exemption in the 1999 Immigration and Asylum Act – a clause removed in the updated 2014 legislation.

 

 

Frances Webber, a former barrister and vice-chair of the Institute of Race Relations, discovered the deletion of the clause. “I find it very frightening that rights can be removed in this way, surreptitiously, with no debate,” she said.

 

 

“It is particularly cruel that the people secretly stripped of these rights will by definition have lived here for getting on for half a century. The inhumanity of it, and the disregard for democracy, are breathtaking. The deletion of the exemption was clearly deliberate … There is a gap in the protection for long-resident Commonwealth citizens, which needs to be filled.”

 

 

Diane Abbott, the shadow home secretary, criticised the removal of the clause without parliamentary debate or announcement and urged the government to rethink it. “We want the legal protections that were previously given to be upheld,” she said. “It would be a small matter to alter the law. But it would mean a great deal to those affected, and enhance this country’s reputation for fair dealing and keeping its word.”

 

Satbir Singh, the chief executive of the Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants, said: “This is yet another example of the government reneging on its commitments to the Commonwealth. It would be simple to correct this oversight, and the government needs to act immediately to do so. Our rights should never be removed in secret or by accident.”

 

 

They are a nasty bunch of liars and very shallow people, self interests to the core, a new rat has taken over.

 

My goodness, where to begin. How about the previous Labour government taking the decision to destroy the records that existed about the Windrush immigrants. That decision had horrendous consequenses. What about the phrase "hostile environment" for illegal immigrants first coined by the previous Labour government. Sajid Javid has said he will ensure the Wndrush generation are treated properly and that they will receive full compensation. 

Perhaps you need to take anger management classes.

[deesidejambo]

1 hour ago, Cade said:

Illegal immigrants should be deported. Nobody is arguing that point.

 

The fact is that the governments "hostile environment" policy is also resulting in LEGAL migrants also being deported.

 

The Home Office is in a complete shambles.

At risk of being labelled a Tory again -

 

No Windrush people have been deported.   Of course the whole thing is a shambles but please keep to real evidence. 

 

Illegal migrants  - deport - no problem with that.  Note 72 illegal migrants have been deported after serving prison sentences for murder, rape, drug dealing, armed robbery, and other serious crimes.    I have no problem with that.

 

As for those who are here from Windrush - also no problem - they are British.

 

But people on her keep conflating the two and accusing the Govt of deporting Windrush people.  That has simply not happened.

 

Agree that now the issue is out in the open Labour and the other parties now need to say what they will do with illegal migrants.   Otherwise the Tories will regain the upper hand.   The opposition parties are missing an open goal if they dont drive this through, but part of tha tis saying what they would themselves do.

 

Also Corbyn needs to control Labours response - just setting Abbot and Lammy on it squealing about the evil Tories wont cut it.

 

 

[Boris]

39 minutes ago, Lord BJ said:

 

They estimate based on various things. In the past they used population v census type stuff which have major holes.

 

Im sure its estimated based of a us system. The name escapes me from memory it’s pretty complex and like most estimates you can poke holes in it. However, generally seems accepted best way of doing something that is difficult to confirm either way.

 

I think they switched to this system circa 10 years ago.

 

Though link below contradicts my memory memory a little.

 

https://www.migrationwatchuk.org/key-topics/illegal-immigration

 

Thanks for the link.

[doctor jambo]

2 hours ago, Cade said:

Illegal immigrants should be deported. Nobody is arguing that point.

 

The fact is that the governments "hostile environment" policy is also resulting in LEGAL migrants also being deported.

 

The Home Office is in a complete shambles.

I would, argue the point that is

I would have an absolute amnesty for all current illegals, providing they attend an embassy and register a name and address now.

( or have a couple of months to do so!)

no point in having a large workforce off the books- bring them on,

 

and I also think we should have immigration targets to meet every year for a new department

 

30,000 engineers, 15000 Dr's 50,000 nurses and so on and actively advertise for them globally

[Cade]

https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/24854/sajid_javid/bromsgrove/votes#home

 

Bloke's a typical arch-Thatcherite Tory *******.

[doctor jambo]

6 minutes ago, Cade said:

https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/24854/sajid_javid/bromsgrove/votes#home

 

Bloke's a typical arch-Thatcherite Tory *******.

Apart from being an immigrant, black, self made , working class muslim

 

 

apart from all that, yes, he's the evil face of Conservatism

[The Real Maroonblood]

10 minutes ago, Cade said:

https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/24854/sajid_javid/bromsgrove/votes#home

 

Bloke's a typical arch-Thatcherite Tory *******.

What a **** he is. 

[Unknown user]

3 minutes ago, doctor jambo said:

Apart from being an immigrant, black, self made , working class muslim

 

 

apart from all that, yes, he's the evil face of Conservatism

 

In what way is he an immigrant?

I know Lancashire seems like another country sometimes but that's pushing it a bit!

[deesidejambo]

16 minutes ago, doctor jambo said:

I would, argue the point that is

I would have an absolute amnesty for all current illegals, providing they attend an embassy and register a name and address now.

( or have a couple of months to do so!)

no point in having a large workforce off the books- bring them on,

 

and I also think we should have immigration targets to meet every year for a new department

 

30,000 engineers, 15000 Dr's 50,000 nurses and so on and actively advertise for them globally

30,000 engineers?    You needing an extension built or something ?

[doctor jambo]

4 minutes ago, Smithee said:

 

In what way is he an immigrant?

I know Lancashire seems like another country sometimes but that's pushing it a bit!

2nd generation, father was an immigrant

not sure when people stop counting themselves as immigrants, every politician currently sees themselves as immigrants,

I'm hoping his first act will be to find Dianne Abbots documents and shred them, then deport her - I don't even care where- just somewhere

[deesidejambo]

Just now, doctor jambo said:

2nd generation, father was an immigrant

not sure when people stop counting themselves as immigrants, every politician currently sees themselves as immigrants,

I'm hoping his first act will be to find Dianne Abbots documents and shred them, then deport her - I don't even care where- just somewhere

Uruguay?

[doctor jambo]

1 minute ago, deesidejambo said:

Uruguay?

Not sure the Abbott works as a nanny, but if she shagged Corbyn there's hope for Lawson

[Unknown user]

5 minutes ago, doctor jambo said:

2nd generation, father was an immigrant

not sure when people stop counting themselves as immigrants, every politician currently sees themselves as immigrants,

I'm hoping his first act will be to find Dianne Abbots documents and shred them, then deport her - I don't even care where- just somewhere

 

immigrant

ˈɪmɪɡr(ə)nt/

noun

a person who comes to live permanently in a foreign country.

 

People who came to this country are immigrants, people who were born here aren't.

[doctor jambo]

1 minute ago, Smithee said:

 

immigrant

ˈɪmɪɡr(ə)nt/

noun

a person who comes to live permanently in a foreign country.

 

People who came to this country are immigrants, people who were born here aren't.

that's kind of why I said when people stop seeing themselves as immigrants, not actually "what is the definition of immigrant"