talkFORUM

Vespa wrote: ↑Fri Apr 12, 2024 1:29 pm

Salem wrote: ↑Fri Apr 12, 2024 12:48 pm

Vespa wrote: ↑Fri Apr 12, 2024 12:41 pm

Salem wrote: ↑Fri Apr 12, 2024 12:17 pm I believe, Vespa , the left leaning parasitic human rights lawyers have a lot to do with who gets deported and who don't

The Home Office grant or deny asylum, if it's a country the UK has a relationship with they have all the tools to deport someone. The government has rolled out the idea lawyers and churches stop them when it's there lack of resources and poor law.

I appreciate that but when the Home Office actually do their job and fill a plane full of the fuckers to deport them , that's where the lawyers step in .

In that case they ruled against one person waiting on a High Court review and the Home Office cancelled the flight

Any ideas who or what was representing that one person waiting on said High Court review ?

Salem wrote: ↑Fri Apr 12, 2024 2:47 pm

Vespa wrote: ↑Fri Apr 12, 2024 1:29 pm

Salem wrote: ↑Fri Apr 12, 2024 12:48 pm

Vespa wrote: ↑Fri Apr 12, 2024 12:41 pm

Salem wrote: ↑Fri Apr 12, 2024 12:17 pm I believe, Vespa , the left leaning parasitic human rights lawyers have a lot to do with who gets deported and who don't

The Home Office grant or deny asylum, if it's a country the UK has a relationship with they have all the tools to deport someone. The government has rolled out the idea lawyers and churches stop them when it's there lack of resources and poor law.

I appreciate that but when the Home Office actually do their job and fill a plane full of the fuckers to deport them , that's where the lawyers step in .

In that case they ruled against one person waiting on a High Court review and the Home Office cancelled the flight

Any ideas who or what was representing that one person waiting on said High Court review ?

A lawyer.

Vespa wrote: ↑Fri Apr 12, 2024 1:12 pm

Holden Mcgroyne wrote: ↑Fri Apr 12, 2024 1:04 pm

Salem wrote: ↑Fri Apr 12, 2024 11:40 am

Vespa wrote: ↑Fri Apr 12, 2024 10:38 am The UK can't deport people to country they don't have a relationship with. Rwanda may have gone easier if it had been limited to moving criminals.

Then , it's time to change things so we CAN deport these fuckers . As the Tories had an 80 seat majority , they could have done anything they wanted . I'm sure the majority of the 'red wall' who voted for them as well as traditional Tory voters would welcome the deportation of foreign criminals .

Alas , with an incoming Labour Government , i can see many more of these foreign criminals roaming the streets .

The ECHR would have stopped them with leftie lawyers lining their pockets at the taxpayers expense

They ruled in favour of some old Swiss dears the other day obliging their government to do more to protect their citizens from the effects of climate change. There'll be some soap dodgers here compiling a case right now.

We need out off that institution ASAP

They ruled against the old dears.

eh ?
https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... e=linkedin

Holden Mcgroyne wrote: ↑Fri Apr 12, 2024 6:48 pm

Vespa wrote: ↑Fri Apr 12, 2024 1:12 pm

Holden Mcgroyne wrote: ↑Fri Apr 12, 2024 1:04 pm

Salem wrote: ↑Fri Apr 12, 2024 11:40 am

Vespa wrote: ↑Fri Apr 12, 2024 10:38 am The UK can't deport people to country they don't have a relationship with. Rwanda may have gone easier if it had been limited to moving criminals.

Then , it's time to change things so we CAN deport these fuckers . As the Tories had an 80 seat majority , they could have done anything they wanted . I'm sure the majority of the 'red wall' who voted for them as well as traditional Tory voters would welcome the deportation of foreign criminals .

Alas , with an incoming Labour Government , i can see many more of these foreign criminals roaming the streets .

The ECHR would have stopped them with leftie lawyers lining their pockets at the taxpayers expense

They ruled in favour of some old Swiss dears the other day obliging their government to do more to protect their citizens from the effects of climate change. There'll be some soap dodgers here compiling a case right now.

We need out off that institution ASAP

They ruled against the old dears.

eh ?
https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... e=linkedin

The Guardian can't read either. There were two cases the four old dears and a climate change organisation made up of hundreds of women which they are in. The court ruled against the old dears and for the organisation. No idea why they talk about the ones that didn't win.

The judgement is here - https://www.klimaseniorinnen.ch/wp-cont ... ERLAND.pdf

Worth noting the only order they made was the government should assess if they need to make changes.

It's a none story because the ECHR is advisory only and can't force any government to do anything.

BTW you can just read the conclusions.