Afghanistan

Ifwecouldjust....... said:
Tories being Tories.
Click to expand...

Or maybe terrorists being terrorists?


A Home Office spokesperson said: "There are people in Afghanistan who represent a serious threat to national security and public safety.

"That is why thorough checks are taking place by government, our world-class intelligence agencies and others.

"If someone is assessed as presenting as a risk to our country, we will take action."

That’s why he was declined. Poised a serious threat to this country according to those who performed background checks on this applicant.
 
metalblue said:
Or maybe terrorists being terrorists?


A Home Office spokesperson said: "There are people in Afghanistan who represent a serious threat to national security and public safety.

"That is why thorough checks are taking place by government, our world-class intelligence agencies and others.

"If someone is assessed as presenting as a risk to our country, we will take action."

That’s why he was declined. Poised a serious threat to this country according to those who performed background checks on this applicant.
Click to expand...

You mean they found out he was Afghan?

So world class, they couldn't even provide a realistic assessment of the Afghan Govt and military.

The Home Office will set the criteria for ‘serious threat’. Has a third cousin who shared a meme on Insta with a mate who is thought to be a Taliban fighter equals serious threat.

Mind you, it's the same people who wet their pants at letting a teen girl back into the country so no real surprise.
 
BobKowalski said:
You mean they found out he was Afghan?

So world class, they couldn't even provide a realistic assessment of the Afghan Govt and military.

The Home Office will set the criteria for ‘serious threat’. Has a third cousin who shared a meme on Insta with a mate who is thought to be a Taliban fighter equals serious threat.

Mind you, it's the same people who wet their pants at letting a teen girl back into the country so no real surprise.
Click to expand...


What that Aqsa Mahmood (aka Umm Layth) who allegedly now runs the female only militia of jihadists? Her? Sweet little thing really? Just misunderstood. Or maybe, just maybe, our intelligence service had her bang to rights to tell her to stay the fuck away from here.

I’ll probably back their judgement, based on all the data they have on an individual, rather than some reporter who just wants to bang a “we let them down” drum. Plenty have been granted relocation so it’s not like we simply refuse anyone on any pretext now is it? So to answer your question; no, not because he was Afghan but because they deemed him a serious threat.

I’m sure you know best though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PPT
metalblue said:
What that Aqsa Mahmood (aka Umm Layth) who allegedly now runs the female only militia of jihadists? Her? Sweet little thing really? Just misunderstood. Or maybe, just maybe, our intelligence service had her bang to rights to tell her to stay the fuck away from here.

I’ll probably back their judgement, based on all the data they have on an individual, rather than some reporter who just wants to bang a “we let them down” drum. Plenty have been granted relocation so it’s not like we simply refuse anyone on any pretext now is it? So to answer your question; no, not because he was Afghan but because they deemed him a serious threat.

I’m sure you know best though.
Click to expand...

No, Shamima Begum.

Our Asylum process is geared to prevent people coming here, the accommodation is designed to make lives miserable - as the Napier Barracks affair demonstrated and over half of our deportations are deemed illegal by the courts, so yeah my confidence in the process is not high and yes, I am sure they will use whatever pretext they can to refuse relocation.

When a Govt and its Home Office has a track record of behaviour, it would seem wise to take that record into account when assessing its claims. For example it quotes our ‘world-class intelligence agencies’. So, world-class it failed to note the Afghan Govt and military wouldn't last five minutes. I mean the French noticed it. Does that make them extra world-class?
 
BobKowalski said:
No, Shamima Begum.

Our Asylum process is geared to prevent people coming here, the accommodation is designed to make lives miserable - as the Napier Barracks affair demonstrated and over half of our deportations are deemed illegal by the courts, so yeah my confidence in the process is not high and yes, I am sure they will use whatever pretext they can to refuse relocation.

When a Govt and its Home Office has a track record of behaviour, it would seem wise to take that record into account when assessing its claims. For example it quotes our ‘world-class intelligence agencies’. So, world-class it failed to note the Afghan Govt and military wouldn't last five minutes. I mean the French noticed it. Does that make them extra world-class?
Click to expand...


I fully agree our asylum process is a disgrace. It’s basically designed to prevent you ever getting asylum- it’s bat shit crazy and needs a complete overhaul. But for relocating Afghans, the subject of this thread, that process was somewhat less arduous.

As for our intelligence services, without question they have foiled terrorist attacks, about 1 every couple of months on average in the last few years. So yeah I’ll take their track record into account.
 
mat said:
the fucking dog.
Click to expand...

How dare you insult cartoon dogs....Oh Yes........

I meant his idol Winston - you know the one who got the BEF to Dunkirk then fucked off on holiday whilst others organised Operation Dynamo......oh no wait.....that never happened because that Churchill had a sense of duty
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top