You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > Grooming Gangs + Tommy Robinson Thread
December 7 2024 2.06am

This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.

Grooming Gangs + Tommy Robinson Thread

Previous Topic | Next Topic


Page 483 of 495 < 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 >

  

Wisbech Eagle Flag Truro Cornwall 07 Jun 24 6.59pm Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger

Right now we are.

Obviously, Sharia Law is not acceptable in Britain for crimes of this nature, but deportation should be an option in such cases.

What is most troubling is that we just let hundreds of thousands more pakistanis in last year.

Do we never learn? Are we always going to use the 'not all pakistani Muslims are rapists' line as a logical reason to keep compounding an already big problem?

It is an option, but one with heavy exceptions. You may find this internal guidance interesting:-

[Link]

Go to the section about British citizens and others exempt from deportation.

 


For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
Yellow Card - User has been warned of conduct on the messageboards Hrolf The Ganger Flag 07 Jun 24 7.28pm Send a Private Message to Hrolf The Ganger Add Hrolf The Ganger as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

It is an option, but one with heavy exceptions. You may find this internal guidance interesting:-

[Link]

Go to the section about British citizens and others exempt from deportation.

Like I said previously. Desperate times call for desperate measures. The rules can be changed.
It only takes a consensus of minds or nations, and all can be different.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
Behind Enemy Lines Flag Sussex 07 Jun 24 7.37pm Send a Private Message to Behind Enemy Lines Add Behind Enemy Lines as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

It is an option, but one with heavy exceptions. You may find this internal guidance interesting:-

[Link]

Go to the section about British citizens and others exempt from deportation.

Not sure how far you read down the attached, but it goes onto say that pakistan withdrew from the Commonwealth in 1972 and rejoined in 1989. Is there a 17 year gap where individuals who arrived here during those years could be deported. Need somebody brighter than me to confirm.

 


hats off to palace, they were always gonna be louder, and hate to say it but they were impressive ALL bouncing and singing.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
Wisbech Eagle Flag Truro Cornwall 07 Jun 24 8.44pm Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger

Like I said previously. Desperate times call for desperate measures. The rules can be changed.
It only takes a consensus of minds or nations, and all can be different.

They are certainly desperate measures! Not so sure that the times are, at least in the context you mean.

Might be tricky to get the countries to whom you want to deport people to join the consensus!

Changing rules might seem simple but when international conventions apply it isn’t at all. Ignoring those conventions could cause more problems than they solve

 


For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
Wisbech Eagle Flag Truro Cornwall 07 Jun 24 8.50pm Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Behind Enemy Lines

Not sure how far you read down the attached, but it goes onto say that pakistan withdrew from the Commonwealth in 1972 and rejoined in 1989. Is there a 17 year gap where individuals who arrived here during those years could be deported. Need somebody brighter than me to confirm.

Don’t think it makes any difference. pakistan is listed without any special notes and in a document like this there would probably be. You would need to be a specialist in this area to be certain.

 


For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
palace_in_frogland Flag In a broken dream 07 Jun 24 8.59pm Send a Private Message to palace_in_frogland Add palace_in_frogland as a friend

Originally posted by cryrst

Well if sharia law means these c***s are stoned to death then I’m having five large stones and a bag of gravel please

“Who threw that? Come on, who was it?”

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
cryrst Flag The garden of England 07 Jun 24 9.05pm Send a Private Message to cryrst Add cryrst as a friend

Originally posted by palace_in_frogland

“Who threw that? Come on, who was it?”

You got it

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
Yellow Card - User has been warned of conduct on the messageboards Hrolf The Ganger Flag 08 Jun 24 1.15pm Send a Private Message to Hrolf The Ganger Add Hrolf The Ganger as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

They are certainly desperate measures! Not so sure that the times are, at least in the context you mean.

Might be tricky to get the countries to whom you want to deport people to join the consensus!

Changing rules might seem simple but when international conventions apply it isn’t at all. Ignoring those conventions could cause more problems than they solve

People's minds change when things get bad enough. Conventions are designed to make the world better.
When they stop doing that, they have to be rewritten.

Clinging on to something that is largely obsolete just because it was once considered appropriate, is not much better than having religious faith.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
Badger11 Flag Beckenham 08 Jun 24 1.35pm Send a Private Message to Badger11 Add Badger11 as a friend

Originally posted by palace_in_frogland

“Who threw that? Come on, who was it?”

"Let he who has not sinned cast the first stone."

"Mother, put that rock down".

 


One more point

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
Wisbech Eagle Flag Truro Cornwall 08 Jun 24 2.43pm Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger

People's minds change when things get bad enough. Conventions are designed to make the world better.
When they stop doing that, they have to be rewritten.

Clinging on to something that is largely obsolete just because it was once considered appropriate, is not much better than having religious faith.

Conventions need to be agreed internationally and ratified individually.

Can you see the kind of changes you seem to want being successfully adopted?

The days are long gone when we could just impose our ideas on others.

It might be obsolete for you, but it’s what we have, so we had better find more practical solutions than expecting the rules to be changed just to suit us.

Going full on isolation would stop the flow, but not improve anything at home. It would also reduce trade dramatically and affect us so much that it would soon be reversed.

 


For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
Teddy Eagle Flag 08 Jun 24 2.46pm Send a Private Message to Teddy Eagle Add Teddy Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

Conventions need to be agreed internationally and ratified individually.

Can you see the kind of changes you seem to want being successfully adopted?

The days are long gone when we could just impose our ideas on others.

It might be obsolete for you, but it’s what we have, so we had better find more practical solutions than expecting the rules to be changed just to suit us.

Going full on isolation would stop the flow, but not improve anything at home. It would also reduce trade dramatically and affect us so much that it would soon be reversed.

Why would it just suit us? There might be some countries who don't want to see a constant stream of doctors and nurses leaving.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
Wisbech Eagle Flag Truro Cornwall 08 Jun 24 3.38pm Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Teddy Eagle

Why would it just suit us? There might be some countries who don't want to see a constant stream of doctors and nurses leaving.

There might, but there are others who train many in the hope they will go abroad and sent their remittances back.

Getting any kind of international convention to stop that isn’t going to happen in the foreseeable future. We might get some bilateral agreements in place to limit numbers but those who want to come are many and wouldn’t take it lying down.

In many ways it’s healthy because some of our people also spend time overseas and gain very valuable experience as a result.

 


For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply

  

Page 483 of 495 < 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > Grooming Gangs + Tommy Robinson Thread