tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4512174593401397821.post902003311190543439..comments2007-12-14T07:34:07.264-08:00Comments on The Four Horsemen: An Image of.......Witchfinder Generalhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05885775195804163741noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4512174593401397821.post-64230731229103894912007-12-14T05:47:00.000-08:002007-12-14T05:47:00.000-08:00Ah but they weren't real hijackers, but merely peo...Ah but they weren't real hijackers, but merely people who staged the action (at a cost of however many millions to the Britsh taxpayer through the SAS deployment, the court case, prison costs, social housing, interpreters and everyone else involved) in order to get to Britain (apparently it was cheaper than the lorry fare which is the usual transport of choice). One of the 'hijackers' had 40 members of his own family on the plane. <BR/><BR/>Of course the sacrifice of dozens of British servicemen and billions of pounds to make their country safe from the Taliban regime they claimed to be freeing means that they have been returned there, to assist with rebuilding the nation. Oh, sorry, they haven't. <BR/><BR/>It used to be the case that a gentleman's agreement operated between Britain and France regarding the channel-crossers: anyone without a ticket and passport would be discretely put on the next ferry back. The numbers trying it on were correspondingly low. <BR/><BR/>Unfortunately, lawyers got involved (and I know it's an ill bird that fouls its own nest, but it has to be said anyway). <BR/><BR/>The agreement was 'formalized' by the Dublin Convention of 1992, which provided that refugees were bound to claim asylum in the first safe country they entered. Two things followed: <BR/><BR/>1. Everyone got a right to a court hearing, to determine their claim including whether Britain was the first safe country the refugee entered. <BR/><BR/>2. Though it would often be obvious that Britain was not, it would be impossible to prove which was (and if you are in the back of a lorry with no windows, you probably wouldn't know yourself). Thus you could not be returned. <BR/><BR/>3. Just to top things off, the Human Rights Act imported the European Convention and thus added another string to the claimants' bows. They could say that returning them would breach their rights to life and right against torture, and also their right to private and family life if enough of their clan had made it here already. <BR/><BR/>Thus, everyone could now stay in Britain and tie up resources in legal proceedings (at public expense) for years at a time. Of course, most failed claimants melted away into the underground economy anyway, leaving the Government to pursue the ones it could find, namely the few who had actually made a respectable life for themselves, like a Nigerian chap who had started a broking firm in the city and was by all accounts a model citizen - to his downfall, as he paid tax and put his name to other official documentation. <BR/><BR/>4. The solution isn't difficult. It does not take a judicial process to determine that someone hopping off the Eurostar or a channel ferry or a plane arriving from Europe is not an asylum seeker at all, but an economic migrant. Absent valid documentation they should be returned to the country which wrongly let them on said vehicle/vessel/plane and the operator of the same should be fined. France, Holland, Belgium and Spain might then have an incentive to stop people wrongly entering their countries in the first place, instead of waving them on to the channel ports/airports. <BR/><BR/>The much reduced numbers in Britain could have their claims dealt with much more quickly. In the meantime they should receive temporary work permits (of a fixed duration to coincide with the legal process) rather than benefits. At the moment they aren't allowed to work whether they want to or not. The low level of benefits they receive encourage them to work in the black economy and lie about it to officialdom - a wonderful message to receive from your first few months in a country. <BR/><BR/>It is said that asylum seekers perform jobs the British don't wish to, at knock down rates too. Great, so back to sanitised slavery then. In fact they do do such jobs, but without any sort of labour law protection or unions, so they get exploited badly, and have every reason not to bother doing their jobs properly. Such is the reason fast food places in London are now samonella joints that serve food I wouldn't offer to my dog. Others drive unlicenced minicabs with the attendant risks to passengers and other road users (they are unlikely to be familiar with the Highway Code in my experience). <BR/><BR/>To the extent that the country needs immigrant labour it should follow the example of Australia, the US etc and have a green card system. It certainly isn't an argument for having the present chaotic asylum system.Political Umpirehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05025804183639479675noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4512174593401397821.post-20194665100244124002007-12-14T04:04:00.000-08:002007-12-14T04:04:00.000-08:00An excellent riposte, if thoroughly depressing! St...An excellent riposte, if thoroughly depressing! Still, I don’t know why I should be surprised. If we can grant hijackers asylum, anything is possible.Witchfinder Generalhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05885775195804163741noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4512174593401397821.post-55731238154626827032007-12-13T09:49:00.000-08:002007-12-13T09:49:00.000-08:00Sad to say he might not even be the least deservin...Sad to say he might not even be the least deserving of our tax-beneficiaries. There was a ruling of the European Court of Human Rights on the case of an admitted Sikh terrorist a few years ago. He could not be deported to India, despite everyone accepting he was a terrorist, because there was a risk he could face the death penalty there. So he gets to live here in a state house on state benefits, theoretically indefinitely, instead. But I'm sure the Guardian and Independent newspapers will be thrilled to give him a job on the basis he is the living embodiment of the rights-based culture they are anxious to have control our immigration policy.Political Umpirehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05025804183639479675noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4512174593401397821.post-91748649179553495292007-12-12T04:39:00.000-08:002007-12-12T04:39:00.000-08:00Re Taliban soldier: he sounds like an ideal indivi...Re Taliban soldier: he sounds like an ideal individual to grant asylum. No doubt he has made an outstanding cultural and economic contribution to our nation. <BR/><BR/>Only a country as weak as this would do it.Witchfinder Generalhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05885775195804163741noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4512174593401397821.post-55055013882614387902007-12-12T02:37:00.000-08:002007-12-12T02:37:00.000-08:00I just hope Mrs Gibbons is careful about whom she ...I just hope Mrs Gibbons is careful about whom she chooses as her neighbours now she is back in Britain. After all, this is a country which in 2002 granted asylum to a former Taliban soldier who admitted having fought against the British and Americans in Afghanistan, but feared returning now his lot were out of power, as the regime there was now favourable to Britain & American and disposed to oppressing former Taliban combatants. I'm sure he's a civilised, Guardian reading member of the North London dinner party set at heart, but I still wouldn't risk offending his precious religious sensibilities if I were Mrs G.Political Umpirehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05025804183639479675noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4512174593401397821.post-33513799530994660262007-12-11T09:26:00.000-08:002007-12-11T09:26:00.000-08:00I think I noted one of your comments on your blog ...I think I noted one of your comments on your blog about Palmerstonerian Diplomacy. Sounds like a good idea.<BR/><BR/>I am sick of hearing about the political correctness of respecting religious beliefs, and that is any religion not just the idiocy of Islam. Religions should not be respected. They should be insulted and ridiculed as often as possible, for the worthless nonesense that they are.Witchfinder Generalhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05885775195804163741noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4512174593401397821.post-67866531798392921272007-12-11T05:16:00.000-08:002007-12-11T05:16:00.000-08:00I thought the Trident replacement might need testi...I thought the Trident replacement might need testing at one point ... <BR/><BR/>What really grated was the fact that so many in Britain and elsewhere agreed that the arrest of this woman was wrong, but argued nevertheless that it was a 'misunderstanding' and that we should be careful to 'respect' the beliefs of those responsible. <BR/><BR/>Why respect beliefs just because someone happens to hold them very strongly? I am sure Dr Shipman and Fred West must have had very strong convictions, but that does not render them worthy of respect. Indeed, Peter Sutcliffe specifically warbled on about voices from the almighty telling him to kill prostitutes. Those beliefs are dismissed out of hand as the worthless ravings of madmen. Why not the teddy bear oppressers?Political Umpirehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05025804183639479675noreply@blogger.com