3 ms·

Brutal? It's not brutal - it's positively tame. Take a look at the Australian system under Abott if you want 'brutal'. This is simply a Sovereign State softly r

Brutal? It's not brutal - it's positively tame. Take a look at the Australian system under Abott if you want 'brutal'. This is simply a Sovereign State softly removing those with zero right to remain.

bogle 5y ago
The Home Office said, "suspected offences". Funny that the "Sovreign State" tried this in Scotland, isn't it?
- callamdelaney 5y ago
  What's the fact that it was in Scotland got to do with it? It's baseless to believe that the home office would target something in Sturgeons constituency on some particular day, especially when there's no political advantage to be drawn by said act. Immigration law applies to Scotland too; until there's a nice border there (but that's another topic).
  - bogle 5y ago
    I see your jingoistic sensibilities are clouding your thinking. Your political nous is also somewhat lacking, perhaps, if you can't see the power play here.
    - callamdelaney 5y ago
      So instead of making your point, my thinking is too clouded to come to the same unexplained conclusion as you?
      - DyslexicAtheist 5y ago
        this is a bad-faith argument: > It's baseless to believe that the home office would target something in Sturgeons constituency on some particular day, especially when there's no political advantage to be drawn by said act. Judging by #10's behavior as a predictor for future behavior there is every reason to believe it was very much on purpose (and far from "baseless"). And even it wasn't on purpose it would now be on them to apologize and try to straighten things out - which ofc they don't.
        callamdelaney 5y ago
        If you were trying to argue your point in good faith you would have provided some examples of the behaviour you are talking about, of which I know of no examples. To be specific I can't think of a time that #10 have gone out of their way to do something like this, or anything else to directly antagonise Sturgeon.
pseudo0 5y ago
Tens of thousands of migrants have died trying to cross the Mediterranean to reach Europe. How many have died trying to reach Australia since their strict immigration policies were put in place? It might seem counterintuitive, but that "brutal" system saves thousands of lives each year.
Barrin92 5y ago
>This is simply a Sovereign State softly removing those with zero right to remain. Nothing simple about that given that merely a year or two ago there effectively was no border, and now ordinary people who want to go look for a job sit in detention cells? Who does this help and how is it tame? The UK more than any other European country should know the devastation borders can wreak.
- callamdelaney 5y ago
  Why do you resort to emotive language? This is a very simple policy. If the law changes, and you break the new law, you are still breaking the law. Borders are determined by the desires of those within them. The right to self-determination is a key principle of international law (unless you're Spain, apparently).
  - olodus 5y ago
    It might be a simple policy but your border guards seem to have misunderstood it. It says EU citizens are allowed to enter UK for interviews but they are still being detained. It is perfectly OK if you want to have inefficient system (wasting UK money on holding people who does not need to be held) but we as EU countries just ask that you give our citizens the possibility to call our embassies before you detain them to let us help them out of your country. Until then we will continue to calling you douchebags for how you treat our citizens that are trying to enter your country legally, sorry for the emotionally loaded words.
    - Symbiote 5y ago
      Please target your anger to at most half of the British people. (I will gladly join in.) With the UK's horrifically undemocratic voting system, the leading party often wins a strong majority of the power in Parliament with significantly less than half the national vote. In the 2019 election, the Conservative party won 56.2% of the seats in Parliament with 43.6% of the vote.[0] In 2017, 48.8% of seats came from 42.4% of the vote. In 2015, 50.8% of seats came from 36.8% of the vote. In 2010, 47.1% of seats came from 36.1% of the vote. In 2005, 55.2% of seats came from 35.2% of the vote. In 2001, 62.5% of seats came from 40.7% of the vote. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_United_Kingdom_general_election#Summary https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_United_Kingdom_general_el... and links to other elections at the bottom.
gambiting 5y ago
>>This is simply a Sovereign State softly removing those with zero right to remain. Except that the official guidance by the Home Office clearly states that EU citizens can still enter visa-free to look for jobs. But of course as it always happens border force knows better than the Home Office. The fact that people are being actually sent to detention centres is beyond idiotic.
- fakedang 5y ago
  They can't enter visa free to "look for jobs" though. Per the guidelines, unless I'm missing something, they are allowed "to attend meetings, conferences and interviews". Interviewing is a very different status from looking for employment, and one that is documented too.

bogle 5y ago

The Home Office said, "suspected offences". Funny that the "Sovreign State" tried this in Scotland, isn't it?

callamdelaney 5y ago
What's the fact that it was in Scotland got to do with it? It's baseless to believe that the home office would target something in Sturgeons constituency on some particular day, especially when there's no political advantage to be drawn by said act. Immigration law applies to Scotland too; until there's a nice border there (but that's another topic).
- bogle 5y ago
  I see your jingoistic sensibilities are clouding your thinking. Your political nous is also somewhat lacking, perhaps, if you can't see the power play here.
  - callamdelaney 5y ago
    So instead of making your point, my thinking is too clouded to come to the same unexplained conclusion as you?
    - DyslexicAtheist 5y ago
      this is a bad-faith argument: > It's baseless to believe that the home office would target something in Sturgeons constituency on some particular day, especially when there's no political advantage to be drawn by said act. Judging by #10's behavior as a predictor for future behavior there is every reason to believe it was very much on purpose (and far from "baseless"). And even it wasn't on purpose it would now be on them to apologize and try to straighten things out - which ofc they don't.
      - callamdelaney 5y ago
        If you were trying to argue your point in good faith you would have provided some examples of the behaviour you are talking about, of which I know of no examples. To be specific I can't think of a time that #10 have gone out of their way to do something like this, or anything else to directly antagonise Sturgeon.

pseudo0 5y ago

Tens of thousands of migrants have died trying to cross the Mediterranean to reach Europe. How many have died trying to reach Australia since their strict immigration policies were put in place? It might seem counterintuitive, but that "brutal" system saves thousands of lives each year.

Barrin92 5y ago

>This is simply a Sovereign State softly removing those with zero right to remain. Nothing simple about that given that merely a year or two ago there effectively was no border, and now ordinary people who want to go look for a job sit in detention cells? Who does this help and how is it tame? The UK more than any other European country should know the devastation borders can wreak.

callamdelaney 5y ago
Why do you resort to emotive language? This is a very simple policy. If the law changes, and you break the new law, you are still breaking the law. Borders are determined by the desires of those within them. The right to self-determination is a key principle of international law (unless you're Spain, apparently).
- olodus 5y ago
  It might be a simple policy but your border guards seem to have misunderstood it. It says EU citizens are allowed to enter UK for interviews but they are still being detained. It is perfectly OK if you want to have inefficient system (wasting UK money on holding people who does not need to be held) but we as EU countries just ask that you give our citizens the possibility to call our embassies before you detain them to let us help them out of your country. Until then we will continue to calling you douchebags for how you treat our citizens that are trying to enter your country legally, sorry for the emotionally loaded words.
  - Symbiote 5y ago
    Please target your anger to at most half of the British people. (I will gladly join in.) With the UK's horrifically undemocratic voting system, the leading party often wins a strong majority of the power in Parliament with significantly less than half the national vote. In the 2019 election, the Conservative party won 56.2% of the seats in Parliament with 43.6% of the vote.[0] In 2017, 48.8% of seats came from 42.4% of the vote. In 2015, 50.8% of seats came from 36.8% of the vote. In 2010, 47.1% of seats came from 36.1% of the vote. In 2005, 55.2% of seats came from 35.2% of the vote. In 2001, 62.5% of seats came from 40.7% of the vote. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_United_Kingdom_general_election#Summary https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_United_Kingdom_general_el... and links to other elections at the bottom.

gambiting 5y ago

>>This is simply a Sovereign State softly removing those with zero right to remain. Except that the official guidance by the Home Office clearly states that EU citizens can still enter visa-free to look for jobs. But of course as it always happens border force knows better than the Home Office. The fact that people are being actually sent to detention centres is beyond idiotic.

fakedang 5y ago
They can't enter visa free to "look for jobs" though. Per the guidelines, unless I'm missing something, they are allowed "to attend meetings, conferences and interviews". Interviewing is a very different status from looking for employment, and one that is documented too.