Why not send them back instead of wasting money?

BBC NEWS | England | London | Asylum centre rampage 'planned'

 

If any asylum seeker has caused criminal damage. Simple: criminal charge = asylum automatically refused and deported back to country of origin.

 

It's difficult to argue for any other course of action.

 

I thought of a great idea a few years back.. You can't always send them home as you dont know where they came from but if you load them all up into an old oil tanker/cruise ship that needs to be scrapped you can just set it out to sea.. Problem gone

 

Why has this turned into a poll?

 

"Apply UK justice?"

That will frighten the life out of them i bet...

 

Same thing happened near where I live, yarls wood you may remember got burned down a few years back. Arguments still over who should foot the 80mill+ rebuild costs.

Why do they even exist, apply for asylum then if successful, get granted uk entry, not after. Their problems in their home country are not our problem!

 

What if they need dialysis?

 

Phnurk!

 

Trouble is, the administration of British justice is as weak as water now.

Les

 

I think you know the answer to that

 

A great philosopher once said "if the roofs on fire homie Let them burn let them burn"

 

And yet you promote making arbitary exceptions, further weakening its position, go figure!

 

 

Cobblers.


It's perfectly feasible to have a strong justice system that has recognised exceptions.

 

1. I am not Gordon Brown so therefore value other peoples opinions.
2. Peoples opinions count.
3. We are a democracy with the right to vote (allegedly, see reply 1).

 

YouTube - Half A Shilling - "Send The Buggers Back"

 

Name one.

 

If they're feeling slightly ill.

 

Given their nationalities I cannot understand why they are asylum seekers at all - I would send them straight back.

 

Shouldn't there be a 4th option: "Employ rule 303"?

 

What do you mean "name one" It happens all the time. What sort of question is that?

All that has been suggested is that an exceptions be made in severe cases - exceptions be made in all sorts of circumstances - it happens in all walks of like.

Doesn't mean your policy is weak just because you have exceptions to the rule.

 

Yeah 'cos cancer and kidney failure is "feeling slightly ill"


Man, don't me wipe the floor with the pair of you in another thread - you've been shown up enough already

 

Well the Poll on "The other thread" says 112/5. So you are wiping the floor with no one. Certainly not me.

All you did on the other thread was quote Government reports for LEGAL immigrants, when the thread was about ILLEGAL immigrants.

You also suggested that every other website would have had a different result, and Scoobynet is visited mostly by right wing morons.

I fail to see how you've wiped the floor with anyone.

 

Not quite
Again I think you slightly missed the point.
Never mind, I'm sure you'll get there eventually

 

So Les considers the current British Justice system to be weak. You say a justice system can be strong and still have excpetions. Please tell me which justice system in the world has a strong laws on immigration and yet make exceptions.

And yet
it would seem it wasn't an exceptional case anyway.

I disagree. If you make an exception because somebody is ill, then it's very hard to not make the same exception if somebody else is ill. Then it's a case of which illness do you have to have to qualify and the whole thing becomes unenforcable, which is to a certain extent where we are now.

They have now set up a fund to pay for the woman's treatment so feel free to contribute: BBC NEWS | Wales | Appeal fund to help African woman

 

I already have.

I could reply to each of your points in turn - but it would be a pointless excercise, I'm not going to continue this circular argument any further - I think we all know where we stand - You're not going to convince me and vice versa. End of.

If you see this as a cop out, fine, I really don't care.

 

Bollox

Easy to say, hard to prove.

 

I think you'll find I have to prove precisely **** all to you.

 

That's because you haven't given to the fund that's why.