Suella Braverman - sacked as Home Secretary (p394)

[bluethrunthru]

It's easy to take the moral high-ground, by posting something like that, but what do you suggest to solve it: open borders?

Anyone from Afghanistan, Iran, Pakistan and anywhere in Africa can up-sticks and move to Europe, many aiming to get to the UK, is that your solution?

Can you explain where in International Law there is a requirement for them to stop in somewhere in Africa or Europe?

 

[El_george]

Don’t think that’s anyones solution, though if it is it’s still a better one than yours.

Can you explain where in International Law there is a requirement for them to stop in somewhere in Africa or Europe?

Well, as the climate change issue becomes more acute then we can look forward to 100 million/200 million population in Britain, with immigrants outnumbering the people born here, I don't like the idea of that, even if you two do. Perhaps 'International Law' needs changing?

 

[blueparrot]

Well, as the climate change issue becomes more acute then we can look forward to 100 million/200 million population in Britain, with immigrants outnumbering the people born here, I don't like the idea of that, even if you two do. Perhaps 'International Law' needs changing?

Who said that ? It needs a better solution, a solution that works on a big international scale.We did have a bigger scale solution of course, then decided it wasn’t for us and we’d go alone. Hows that working.
Whatever the case with future solutions anyone that is arriving here should be treated with respect ,dignity and their case listened to, thats not international law just basic human rights and it isn’t happening in this country now.

 

[bluethrunthru]

Well, as the climate change issue becomes more acute then we can look forward to 100 million/200 million population in Britain, with immigrants outnumbering the people born here, I don't like the idea of that, even if you two do. Perhaps 'International Law' needs changing?

what a silly response but typical - we don't like International Law so lets change it - the first word is the clue - you would need about 195 countries to agree with you .... we can't even get the 27 EU countries on side ha ha ha ha

 

[bluethrunthru]

Well, as the climate change issue becomes more acute then we can look forward to 100 million/200 million population in Britain, with immigrants outnumbering the people born here, I don't like the idea of that, even if you two do. Perhaps 'International Law' needs changing?

Watch and learn from an expert who as asked to give evidence to a Commons Select C'ttee - you aren't Gullis by any chance are you?

 

[Mr Kobayashi]

Don’t think that’s anyones solution, though if it is it’s still a better one than yours.

I think he would be happy with a final solution tbh.

 

[Scottyboi]

I really don't understand given the chronic issues we currently have in the UK why they are coming anyway.
Must be the pull of our over generous benefits system.

We have one of the worst benefit systems in Western Europe, do you even read up on some of the stuff you come out with? Over generous don't make me laugh.

 

[Mr Kobayashi]

I really don't understand given the chronic issues we currently have in the UK why they are coming anyway.
Must be the pull of our over generous benefits system.

How much do asylum seekers living in hotels get to live on per week? – Full Fact

Some are eligible to receive £8 per week to cover costs for items not provided by their accommodation.

fullfact.org

If an asylum seeker is placed in contingency accommodation such as a hotel, which offers meals, they are eligible for £8.24 per week to cover clothes, non-prescription medication and travel.

So if you want a new outfit you'll have to wait a few weeks even for charity shop clobber. If you want a pair of new shoes you'll have to wait at least a month.

 

[East Level 2]

How much do asylum seekers living in hotels get to live on per week? – Full Fact

Some are eligible to receive £8 per week to cover costs for items not provided by their accommodation.

fullfact.org

If an asylum seeker is placed in contingency accommodation such as a hotel, which offers meals, they are eligible for £8.24 per week to cover clothes, non-prescription medication and travel.

So if you want a new outfit you'll have to wait a few weeks even for charity shop clobber. If you want a pair of new shoes you'll have to wait at least a month.

Bollocks!! They all get council houses with 65" TVs and lots of other stuff. I think it said so in the Mail, and the Gullible Twat Gazette.

 

[The Future’s Blue!]

Bollocks!! They all get council houses with 65" TVs and lots of other stuff. I think it said so in the Mail, and the Gullible Twat Gazette.

Horrible fuck-cunts!

 

[Vic]

Well, as the climate change issue becomes more acute then we can look forward to 100 million/200 million population in Britain, with immigrants outnumbering the people born here, I don't like the idea of that, even if you two do. Perhaps 'International Law' needs changing?

Yeah, let them all drown when our pollution causes their land to flood.

 

[Vic]

what a silly response but typical - we don't like International Law so lets change it - the first word is the clue - you would need about 195 countries to agree with you .... we can't even get the 27 EU countries on side ha ha ha ha

Actually, I think Sunak said last week we might have to change binding international law.

No doubt in specific and limited ways.

 

[bluethrunthru]

Actually, I think Sunak said last week we might have to change binding international law.

No doubt in specific and limited ways.

wonder how we do that without 195 countries deciding to do the same and cancelling our changes out? Is the UK so exceptional that we on our own can change International Law?

 

[NPBlue]

Well, as the climate change issue becomes more acute then we can look forward to 100 million/200 million population in Britain, with immigrants outnumbering the people born here, I don't like the idea of that, even if you two do. Perhaps 'International Law' needs changing?

Get used to it. Calm down and accept it's going happen, though hundreds of millions arriving on our shores is a bit overly melodramatic. The world is changing, and what, exactly, is wrong with people coming here from foreign lands?

There's nothing wrong with Brits migrating en masse to Spain and being foreign twats, so what's the difference?

 

[oldius]

When we crippled our own freedom of movement, assuming that we would be able to 'change people's minds' about wishing to make a life here, we accepted a growing population, like lemmings led by liars.

It's been said, but open the legal routes of entry and process asylum claims - it is what proper countries do - and stop imbeciles like Suella turning you into a fearful and resentful 'prisoner in your own home': she doesn't believe in what she's saying, just that it will win votes.

 

[Vic]

When we crippled our own freedom of movement, assuming that we would be able to 'change people's minds' about wishing to make a life here, we accepted a growing population, like lemmings led by liars.

It's been said, but open the legal routes of entry and process asylum claims - it is what proper countries do - and stop imbeciles like Suella turning you into a fearful and resentful 'prisoner in your own home': she doesn't believe in what she's saying, just that it will win votes.

I had to check. The number of Brits emigrating has slumped from around 130,000 a year before Brexit to 90,000 now. So just about matching the number of people arriving in small boats...

The number of EU citizens emigrating is still increasing, and non-EU citizens are flooding out... (nearly twice the pre-Brexit rate, now around 200,000 a year).

 

[oldius]

I had to check. The number of Brits emigrating has slumped from around 130,000 a year before Brexit to 90,000 now. So just about matching the number of people arriving in small boats...

The number of EU citizens emigrating is still increasing, and non-EU citizens are flooding out... (nearly twice the pre-Brexit rate, now around 200,000 a year).

Thanks for checking.

There were 5.5m UK born nationals living abroad, permanently, but nobody had an issue with that, in fact, it seemed to be a right. Well now it isn't.

I'm in my fifties, and previously enjoyed a period working in the EU. It will now be more difficult for me to do that, and for my children to do that, and I await the benefits of what we have done.

I find it amazing that Suella finds herself in the position she is in, and even more surprising that she rose to the top of the legal profession: she seems incompetent, and her performance at the Select Committee meeting stank of someone who was full of rhetoric but without substance - evidence of someone who is simply a mouthpiece but does not truly believe in her outward stance.

 

[west didsblue]

Thanks for checking.

There were 5.5m UK born nationals living abroad, permanently, but nobody had an issue with that, in fact, it seemed to be a right. Well now it isn't.

I'm in my fifties, and previously enjoyed a period working in the EU. It will now be more difficult for me to do that, and for my children to do that, and I await the benefits of what we have done.

I find it amazing that Suella finds herself in the position she is in, and even more surprising that she rose to the top of the legal profession: she seems incompetent, and her performance at the Select Committee meeting stank of someone who was full of rhetoric but without substance - evidence of someone who is simply a mouthpiece but does not truly believe in her outward stance.

She didn’t rise to the top of the legal profession unless you count the awarding of her QC as a result of her ministerial position. As a lawyer, she was a junior barrister occasionally entrusted with photocopying papers for the partners.

 

[oldius]

She didn’t rise to the top of the legal profession unless you count the awarding of her QC as a result of her ministerial position. As a lawyer, she was a junior barrister occasionally entrusted with photocopying papers for the partners.

Well I'm relieved: I found it hard to accept her credibility would cross two spheres.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

I find it amazing that Suella finds herself in the position she is in, and even more surprising that she rose to the top of the legal profession: she seems incompetent, and her performance at the Select Committee meeting stank of someone who was full of rhetoric but without substance - evidence of someone who is simply a mouthpiece but does not truly believe in her outward stance.

She didn’t rise to the top of the legal profession. Far from it. I suppose technically speaking she was AG, and therefore made a QC, but that was a political appointment. In terms of her career at the bar it was unremarkable to say the least. She was actually considered a bit of a joke.