sorry to interrupt your religious debate , but i did here this guy came down from newcastle on the tele news ( i know i know it cant be trusted ) , so did he come from newcastle and attack this person which means he was payed by someone or was it just random ? does anyone know ?
What we do know is that he travelled to South London from Newcastle, and that he knew the victim, and that she knew him.
I think it likely that they used to be in a relationship which ended badly. And he was looking for some form of revenge
Church aiding asylum claims on mass scale, say Patel and Braverman
Suella Braverman and Dame Priti Patel have hit out at Britain’s churches for their alleged support for “bogus” asylum claims.
Writing for The Telegraph, Mrs Braverman said that during her time as home secretary she “became aware of churches around the country facilitating industrial-scale bogus asylum claims”.
Separately, Dame Priti, also a former home secretary, accused church leaders of “political activism” in their approach to asylum seekers, claiming that religious institutions supported cases “without merit”.
sorry to interrupt your religious debate , but i did here this guy came down from newcastle on the tele news ( i know i know it cant be trusted ) , so did he come from newcastle and attack this person which means he was payed by someone or was it just random ? does anyone know ?
What we do know is that he travelled to South London from Newcastle, and that he knew the victim, and that she knew him.
I think it likely that they used to be in a relationship which ended badly. And he was looking for some form of revenge
New asylum ‘crisis’ as Home Office errors add to avalanche of appeals
Yet again, the Press concentrate on the tiny numbers in order to misdirect attention to where it should be-legal migration.
There have been major problems in relation to language assistance for more than 10 years. But what numbers are we talking about here? That article refers to 3-4,000 people.
Look at the article I posted yesterday. In the last 12 months, we have granted roughly 500,000 student visas. And, on current statistics, within 2 years 150,000 of this years' student intake will change their status in order to legally remain. Some of those will be entering the NHS etc. But way more than 3-4,000 will have always intended to use the student route as the first step to legally remaining here.
Poor and arriving by boat from war-torn country seeking to avoid persecution? Vilified Wealthy parents, arrive by plane to study and then remain? Welcome
Yet again, the Press concentrate on the tiny numbers in order to misdirect attention to where it should be-legal migration.
There have been major problems in relation to language assistance for more than 10 years. But what numbers are we talking about here? That article refers to 3-4,000 people.
Look at the article I posted yesterday. In the last 12 months, we have granted roughly 500,000 student visas. And, on current statistics, within 2 years 150,000 of this years' student intake will change their status in order to legally remain. Some of those will be entering the NHS etc. But way more than 3-4,000 will have always intended to use the student route as the first step to legally remaining here.
Poor and arriving by boat from war-torn country seeking to avoid persecution? Vilified Wealthy parents, arrive by plane to study and then remain? Welcome
We dont seem to have a clue about controlling our borders, closing any loopholes, or how to run anything very much properly.
There was a clear case that it was possible to have a bespoke, UK immigration policy. That could better meet the particular needs of the UK.
Possible. Could. Coulda-woulda-shoulda. But did not.
This is not, as people on both sides of the Brexit debate would have us believe, anything to do with Brexit. Simply because people overestimate just how much EU Law impacts upon both its members and the UK. Then. And now.
The only small bits of relevance are that Eastern European migrant workers from Bulgaria/Romania etc could automatically come here to do temporary work. (That would be the ones we needed). Our expats in Spain/France etc had more security. And some illegal migrants could have been stopped at France, in return for the sorts of payments we are making anyway.
The rest? Nothing to do with being in, or out, of the EU. We would have been free to let hordes of pretend Students in. Nothing in EU Law preventing that. I'm saying that dissidents in Hong Kong could come here, because they used to be run by Britain. 25 years ago. Nothing to do with the EU, in or out. The only difference is that the EU would have been more able to comment upon it, because these people would have had a right to move on.
The worst bit of Brexit is that it has given Tory Politicians the excuse to vilify the sick, the lame, and the frightened. While opening our borders to hundreds of thousands of people from the "right" sort of backgrounds. In record numbers.
Those with money. Not £millions. Just enough to pay for a degree course.
There was a clear case that it was possible to have a bespoke, UK immigration policy. That could better meet the particular needs of the UK.
Possible. Could. Coulda-woulda-shoulda. But did not.
This is not, as people on both sides of the Brexit debate would have us believe, anything to do with Brexit. Simply because people overestimate just how much EU Law impacts upon both its members and the UK. Then. And now.
The only small bits of relevance are that Eastern European migrant workers from Bulgaria/Romania etc could automatically come here to do temporary work. (That would be the ones we needed). Our expats in Spain/France etc had more security. And some illegal migrants could have been stopped at France, in return for the sorts of payments we are making anyway.
The rest? Nothing to do with being in, or out, of the EU. We would have been free to let hordes of pretend Students in. Nothing in EU Law preventing that. I'm saying that dissidents in Hong Kong could come here, because they used to be run by Britain. 25 years ago. Nothing to do with the EU, in or out. The only difference is that the EU would have been more able to comment upon it, because these people would have had a right to move on.
The worst bit of Brexit is that it has given Tory Politicians the excuse to vilify the sick, the lame, and the frightened. While opening our borders to hundreds of thousands of people from the "right" sort of backgrounds. In record numbers.
Those with money. Not £millions. Just enough to pay for a degree course.
I was merely referring to common sense and logic. Our legislators seem to be sadly lacking. I am not going back through it, but we do seem to be world leaders in imposing rules that have plenty of loopholes. We could follow the EU, and US, and take finger prints, and photographs of those entering the country. So we would at lest know who they are. That would be a step closer to controlling our borders.
I am not xenophobic, and have said many times, that we should our fair share of asylum seekers. Not being in control of the numbers does not augur well for the future.
There was a clear case that it was possible to have a bespoke, UK immigration policy. That could better meet the particular needs of the UK.
Possible. Could. Coulda-woulda-shoulda. But did not.
This is not, as people on both sides of the Brexit debate would have us believe, anything to do with Brexit. Simply because people overestimate just how much EU Law impacts upon both its members and the UK. Then. And now.
The only small bits of relevance are that Eastern European migrant workers from Bulgaria/Romania etc could automatically come here to do temporary work. (That would be the ones we needed). Our expats in Spain/France etc had more security. And some illegal migrants could have been stopped at France, in return for the sorts of payments we are making anyway.
The rest? Nothing to do with being in, or out, of the EU. We would have been free to let hordes of pretend Students in. Nothing in EU Law preventing that. I'm saying that dissidents in Hong Kong could come here, because they used to be run by Britain. 25 years ago. Nothing to do with the EU, in or out. The only difference is that the EU would have been more able to comment upon it, because these people would have had a right to move on.
The worst bit of Brexit is that it has given Tory Politicians the excuse to vilify the sick, the lame, and the frightened. While opening our borders to hundreds of thousands of people from the "right" sort of backgrounds. In record numbers.
Those with money. Not £millions. Just enough to pay for a degree course.
Yet again, the Press concentrate on the tiny numbers in order to misdirect attention to where it should be-legal migration.
There have been major problems in relation to language assistance for more than 10 years. But what numbers are we talking about here? That article refers to 3-4,000 people.
Look at the article I posted yesterday. In the last 12 months, we have granted roughly 500,000 student visas. And, on current statistics, within 2 years 150,000 of this years' student intake will change their status in order to legally remain. Some of those will be entering the NHS etc. But way more than 3-4,000 will have always intended to use the student route as the first step to legally remaining here.
Poor and arriving by boat from war-torn country seeking to avoid persecution? Vilified Wealthy parents, arrive by plane to study and then remain? Welcome
'Everything has gone horribly wrong' UK immigration lawyer blasts 'pray to stay' ruse
Comments
Suella Braverman and Dame Priti Patel have hit out at Britain’s churches for their alleged support for “bogus” asylum claims.
Writing for The Telegraph, Mrs Braverman said that during her time as home secretary she “became aware of churches around the country facilitating industrial-scale bogus asylum claims”.
Separately, Dame Priti, also a former home secretary, accused church leaders of “political activism” in their approach to asylum seekers, claiming that religious institutions supported cases “without merit”.
https://uk.yahoo.com/news/church-aiding-asylum-claims-mass-200009611.html
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/new-asylum-crisis-as-home-office-errors-add-to-avalanche-of-appeals/ar-BB1hJLIS?ocid=msedgntp&pc=NMTS&cvid=4911dd0f597a4665b48aef32f6a901d7&ei=74
There have been major problems in relation to language assistance for more than 10 years. But what numbers are we talking about here? That article refers to 3-4,000 people.
Look at the article I posted yesterday. In the last 12 months, we have granted roughly 500,000 student visas. And, on current statistics, within 2 years 150,000 of this years' student intake will change their status in order to legally remain. Some of those will be entering the NHS etc. But way more than 3-4,000 will have always intended to use the student route as the first step to legally remaining here.
Poor and arriving by boat from war-torn country seeking to avoid persecution? Vilified
Wealthy parents, arrive by plane to study and then remain? Welcome
Possible. Could. Coulda-woulda-shoulda. But did not.
This is not, as people on both sides of the Brexit debate would have us believe, anything to do with Brexit. Simply because people overestimate just how much EU Law impacts upon both its members and the UK. Then. And now.
The only small bits of relevance are that Eastern European migrant workers from Bulgaria/Romania etc could automatically come here to do temporary work. (That would be the ones we needed). Our expats in Spain/France etc had more security. And some illegal migrants could have been stopped at France, in return for the sorts of payments we are making anyway.
The rest? Nothing to do with being in, or out, of the EU. We would have been free to let hordes of pretend Students in. Nothing in EU Law preventing that. I'm saying that dissidents in Hong Kong could come here, because they used to be run by Britain. 25 years ago. Nothing to do with the EU, in or out. The only difference is that the EU would have been more able to comment upon it, because these people would have had a right to move on.
The worst bit of Brexit is that it has given Tory Politicians the excuse to vilify the sick, the lame, and the frightened. While opening our borders to hundreds of thousands of people from the "right" sort of backgrounds. In record numbers.
Those with money. Not £millions. Just enough to pay for a degree course.
Our legislators seem to be sadly lacking.
I am not going back through it, but we do seem to be world leaders in imposing rules that have plenty of loopholes.
We could follow the EU, and US, and take finger prints, and photographs of those entering the country.
So we would at lest know who they are.
That would be a step closer to controlling our borders.
I am not xenophobic, and have said many times, that we should our fair share of asylum seekers.
Not being in control of the numbers does not augur well for the future.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/everything-has-gone-horribly-wrong-uk-immigration-lawyer-blasts-pray-to-stay-ruse/ar-BB1hOfa6?ocid=msedgntp&pc=NMTS&cvid=c504bfcf8b3248b9801986d297b5660e&ei=115
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/tory-mp-says-dire-church-of-england-is-complicit-in-facilitating-bogus-asylum-claims-rigging-the-system/ar-BB1hNKVA?ocid=msedgntp&pc=NMTS&cvid=c504bfcf8b3248b9801986d297b5660e&ei=138