Kilkrazy wrote:

 Whirlwind wrote:


When was the last time that we engaged in an attack on another state that wasn't approved by Parliament? ...
...

Early this morning, by the latest news.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
We've joined forces with our close allies to defy the Russians and stand up for international law.

We've helped administer a good bop on the nose to Assad, which will discourage him from using chemical weapons again.

We've sent a warning to other states who might consider following the same path.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
I'm a lot older than a 5-year-old and I think May's done the country a bit of good with this strike.

We've joined forces with our close allies to defy the Russians and stand up for international law.

We've helped administer a good bop on the nose to Assad, which will discourage him from using chemical weapons again.

We've sent a warning to other states who might consider following the same path.

Russia is claiming without providing any evidence that Syrian AA shot down all the missiles.

It will be interesting to see the satellite images of bomb damage assessment.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
It's always embarrassing to see a British Prime Minister with their tongue up America's rear

 Kilkrazy wrote:
If you're talking about Hunt, he didn't break the law. He didn't even break the ministers' code.

Hunt only made a small technical infraction due to getting mistaken advice from his solicitor. He has apologised, and his apology has been accepted.

Herzlos wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
It's always embarrassing to see a British Prime Minister with their tongue up America's rear

Yet with Brexit you're forcing her tongue further up there for the sake of a trade deal.

So Sturgeon has said policy should be determined by parliament and not trump. Cable has expressed concern that parliament wasn't consulted, and Corbyn is demanding May proves what she did is actually legal. She's going to get torn to pieces at PMQ's. At least they won'tbe talking about Brexit for a while.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
If you're talking about Hunt, he didn't break the law. He didn't even break the ministers' code.

Hunt only made a small technical infraction due to getting mistaken advice from his solicitor. He has apologised, and his apology has been accepted.

A small technical infraction which happened to mask a significant conflict of interest, which seems to happen an awful lot to Tory MPs.

 CREEEEEEEEED wrote:
It's odd that in one sense the Salisbury incident could be seen as a declaration of war, but both countries aren't really feeling it so nothing's happening.

Herzlos wrote:
So Sturgeon has said policy should be determined by parliament and not trump. Cable has expressed concern that parliament wasn't consulted, and Corbyn is demanding May proves what she did is actually legal. She's going to get torn to pieces at PMQ's. At least they won't be talking about Brexit for a while.

 Future War Cultist wrote:
Probably as a method to becoming president of the commission.

 CREEEEEEEEED wrote:

Herzlos wrote:
So Sturgeon has said policy should be determined by parliament and not trump. Cable has expressed concern that parliament wasn't consulted, and Corbyn is demanding May proves what she did is actually legal. She's going to get torn to pieces at PMQ's. At least they won't be talking about Brexit for a while.

Mostly agreed, but is Vincent Cable really politically relevant? This has to be the first time I've heard his name in months.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

Herzlos wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
It's always embarrassing to see a British Prime Minister with their tongue up America's rear

Yet with Brexit you're forcing her tongue further up there for the sake of a trade deal.

So Sturgeon has said policy should be determined by parliament and not trump. Cable has expressed concern that parliament wasn't consulted, and Corbyn is demanding May proves what she did is actually legal. She's going to get torn to pieces at PMQ's. At least they won'tbe talking about Brexit for a while.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
If you're talking about Hunt, he didn't break the law. He didn't even break the ministers' code.

Hunt only made a small technical infraction due to getting mistaken advice from his solicitor. He has apologised, and his apology has been accepted.

A small technical infraction which happened to mask a significant conflict of interest, which seems to happen an awful lot to Tory MPs.

There's a big difference between negotiating for a trade deal and rolling up the white flag.

You'll remember that even when we were in the EU, Blair was happy to capitulate on the British rebate.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 CREEEEEEEEED wrote:
It's odd that in one sense the Salisbury incident could be seen as a declaration of war, but both countries aren't really feeling it so nothing's happening.

One country can destroy us 100 times over with its nuclear arsenal. The other country is weak and defenceless, and is ideal for some gesture politics to shore up support for a party that is intellectually and ideologically, bankrupt.

There are many differces between the two

Now, shockingly, the Home Office is targeting the ‘Windrush generation’, the people who came from the West Indies to Britain in 1948 to work and fill gaps in the labour market.

Thousands of people who arrived in the UK as children in the first wave of Commonwealth immigration are being threatened with deportation. They have lived and worked in the UK for decades and consider themselves to be British, but are being told they are here illegally.

The issue has arisen because under the 1971 Immigration Act, all Commonwealth citizens living in the UK were given indefinite leave to remain, but the act abolished the freedom of movement between British Commonwealth nations which existed before.

Until the 1971 Act, the Commonwealth citizens who came to Britain had citizenship rights, and therefore did not need the paperwork that was required of immigrants after the Act was passed. The Home Office seems never to have compiled paperwork on this group and is now, bafflingly, it is implementing its ‘hostile environment’ policies against them, and demanding proof of their right to be in the UK.

Many of the Commonwealth citizens who moved here never formalised their immigration status because they thought of themselves as British. Then, in 1971 they were guaranteed their rights. The Windrush generation often came here as children and didn’t bring their own papers of keep evidence. Those born in Caribbean countries are thought to be more affected than others because they were more likely to arrive on their parents’ passports without their own ID documents.

We are talking here about people who were invited into our country to help rebuild it. They were given the opportunity to make a new life here. They are an integral part of the social fabric.

They have worked hard, paid their taxes and raised families. They are British, pure and simple. They don’t deserve to be threatened and harassed.

Under the hostile environment policy, migrants are required to provide documentary evidence of every year they were in Britain. If you are a Commonwealth citizen who came here in the 1950’s, imagine how difficult that is. If you are poor, or poor at record keeping and paperwork, it may be impossible.

Elwaldo Romeo who moved to Britain from Antigua 59 years ago has now been told he is in the UK illegally. His Home Office letter said he was ‘liable to be detained’ because he was a ‘person without leave’. He now must report fortnightly to Home Office premises, and has been advised that the staff can offer him ‘help and support on returning home voluntarily’.

Paulette Wilson is a former cook at the House of Commons who came to Britain from Jamaica in 1968. She received a letter from the Home Office telling her to register each month at the Solihull immigration centre. Paulette has been threatened with deportation and wrongly sent to immigration removal centres. Earlier this year, the former Labour minister Lord Falconer raised her case:

“While she was there on a visit, officials declared that she was an illegal immigrant, had her carted off to the appalling Yarl’s Wood immigration removal complex and told her that she would be deported – presumably back to Jamaica, which she had not visited since she left as a child almost 50 years before,”

Glenda Caesar has had a career in the NHS, had children here (her eldest is 40) and her mother and father are buried in UK soil. She has lived here almost all her life and considers herself British, but because she has no ID records of her arrival she faces an uncertain future.

It is utterly appalling and brings shame to our country.

This is unacceptable. If you agree, I urge you to write to your MP about this matter and sign the petition calling for amnesty for the Windrush generation of migrants who came here as children. If even a single one of the Windrush generation is deported having been granted rights, it will be a sickening historic injustice. That we are even having to discuss this is disgusting.

 reds8n wrote:
https://reaction.life/incompetence-insensitivity-home-office-national-disgrace/

Now, shockingly, the Home Office is targeting the ‘Windrush generation’, the people who came from the West Indies to Britain in 1948 to work and fill gaps in the labour market.

Thousands of people who arrived in the UK as children in the first wave of Commonwealth immigration are being threatened with deportation. They have lived and worked in the UK for decades and consider themselves to be British, but are being told they are here illegally.

The issue has arisen because under the 1971 Immigration Act, all Commonwealth citizens living in the UK were given indefinite leave to remain, but the act abolished the freedom of movement between British Commonwealth nations which existed before.

Until the 1971 Act, the Commonwealth citizens who came to Britain had citizenship rights, and therefore did not need the paperwork that was required of immigrants after the Act was passed. The Home Office seems never to have compiled paperwork on this group and is now, bafflingly, it is implementing its ‘hostile environment’ policies against them, and demanding proof of their right to be in the UK.

Many of the Commonwealth citizens who moved here never formalised their immigration status because they thought of themselves as British. Then, in 1971 they were guaranteed their rights. The Windrush generation often came here as children and didn’t bring their own papers of keep evidence. Those born in Caribbean countries are thought to be more affected than others because they were more likely to arrive on their parents’ passports without their own ID documents.

We are talking here about people who were invited into our country to help rebuild it. They were given the opportunity to make a new life here. They are an integral part of the social fabric.

They have worked hard, paid their taxes and raised families. They are British, pure and simple. They don’t deserve to be threatened and harassed.

Under the hostile environment policy, migrants are required to provide documentary evidence of every year they were in Britain. If you are a Commonwealth citizen who came here in the 1950’s, imagine how difficult that is. If you are poor, or poor at record keeping and paperwork, it may be impossible.

Elwaldo Romeo who moved to Britain from Antigua 59 years ago has now been told he is in the UK illegally. His Home Office letter said he was ‘liable to be detained’ because he was a ‘person without leave’. He now must report fortnightly to Home Office premises, and has been advised that the staff can offer him ‘help and support on returning home voluntarily’.

Paulette Wilson is a former cook at the House of Commons who came to Britain from Jamaica in 1968. She received a letter from the Home Office telling her to register each month at the Solihull immigration centre. Paulette has been threatened with deportation and wrongly sent to immigration removal centres. Earlier this year, the former Labour minister Lord Falconer raised her case:

“While she was there on a visit, officials declared that she was an illegal immigrant, had her carted off to the appalling Yarl’s Wood immigration removal complex and told her that she would be deported – presumably back to Jamaica, which she had not visited since she left as a child almost 50 years before,”

Glenda Caesar has had a career in the NHS, had children here (her eldest is 40) and her mother and father are buried in UK soil. She has lived here almost all her life and considers herself British, but because she has no ID records of her arrival she faces an uncertain future.

It is utterly appalling and brings shame to our country.

This is unacceptable. If you agree, I urge you to write to your MP about this matter and sign the petition calling for amnesty for the Windrush generation of migrants who came here as children. If even a single one of the Windrush generation is deported having been granted rights, it will be a sickening historic injustice. That we are even having to discuss this is disgusting.

..... really starting to wonder if the Home Office is at all fit for purpose.

further :
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-43726976

 Future War Cultist wrote:
See, this is why I utterly despise this country at times. They won’t block or deport murderous parasitical jihadi scum buckets but they’ll go after decent hard working people who have literally risked life and limb for the country, presumably because they’re soft targets. It’s stomach churning.

 Ketara wrote:

 Future War Cultist wrote:
See, this is why I utterly despise this country at times. They won’t block or deport murderous parasitical jihadi scum buckets but they’ll go after decent hard working people who have literally risked life and limb for the country, presumably because they’re soft targets. It’s stomach churning.

Nah. It's just down to paperwork. Pure and simple. You have no right to be here? The Home Office will come after you as soon as they're aware of the situation. Doesn't matter what you've done, doesn't matter how long you've been here. It's just the faceless mound of bureaucracy which spits out papers, assesses visas and sometimes loses documents for a decade before rediscovering and acting on them. The people who've been here thirty years will have the exact same recourse as any other immigrant would do with their legal status (plea to stay under right to family life, appeal to HS, etc).

That's.....just how bureaucracy and government institutions work. After retiring, most ministers often say that they're nothing more than putty in the hands of Civil Service heads, who themselves barely have a finger on the wheel of direction for these behemoth departments. And they're not lying. But it's their faces on the front, so they're the ones that tend to get roasted when some mid-level Home Office wonk sitting in Scunthorpe rediscovers a batch of immigrants who were never properly processed and starts proceedings according to the rulebook.

AdmiralHalsey wrote:

Then, with all due respect, someone had better re-write the rulebook, update the system, and pull their fingers out their unmentionables.