Reply to: Let it make sense

[SueEllen]

At the time I thought it ironic that Tony Blair's Government brought in the legislation while his wife's Chambers(Matrix Chambers) made a fortune from that very legislation - any other country you'd assume it were corrupt...

The Blairs and making money....

Now that makes sense.

[Zigenare]

It is English, and perfectly clear to any with a modicum of historical knowledge. Labour are saying the Tory plan won't work because it breaks the Human Rights laws embodied in the UK by the Blair government. We can ignore the EU Human Rights law, but we can't ignore our own. Which is not unreasonable.

Equally clearly, the option of changing UK's laws is clearly not worth considering...

And since most of the issues around controlling immigration and - more importantly - deportation are driven by Human Rights lawyers, both practising or elevated to the Bench, and our government is lead by such a lawyer who prefers international law to our own, nothing is going to change, and we will continue to be stuck with Polish rapists who can't speak Polish.

As for the grammar, "to" is a typo for "so". A million apologies for causing a failure of comprehension.

At the time I thought it ironic that Tony Blair's Government brought in the legislation while his wife's Chambers(Matrix Chambers) made a fortune from that very legislation - any other country you'd assume it were corrupt...

[malvolio]

I think hobnob is right.

Polish rapist can't be deported because he doesn't speak Polish
is somewhat more emotive than
Polish drug dealer can't be deported because he doesn't speak Polish

No, this isn't a court of law, but it is a rather informal debating chamber. You are the one who posted an untruth - it's others who are doing the forensic analysis. If you're going to make comments there's a certain responsibility to be accurate. You certainly come down hard enough on others who innocently post untruths!

Of course hobnob is right, but my point is that regardless of the inaccuracy in my recollection of the case there is a wider issue that's getting lost in the noise.

And if the person in question is liable for return to Poland, he's clearly not a UK citizen no matter how long he's been here. That he can't speak Polish (and that's assuming he is telling the truth...) is not really our problem.

[malvolio]

I think that "cite your sources" is a good principle in general, especially if you want people to take you seriously.

You started out by implying that there were several people matching this description, i.e. that it's a wide scale problem. Then you said that it's one specific person. Now you've admitted that he didn't actually commit the crime you've accused him of.

So, we're left with "There could be loads of foreigners who move to the UK as young children and then commit horrific crimes as adults, but we can't deport them". That's true - there might be. Then again, there might not be. I think facts take precedence over feelings, but apparently you "CBA" with that.

Rubbish. This is not a court, its a debating chamber. Or not , as the case may be.

So what is your view on the substantive point? Not that i gas anyway.

[hobnob]

OK, imperfect recollection. Possibly I CBA to do forensic research on every post.

I think that "cite your sources" is a good principle in general, especially if you want people to take you seriously.

You started out by implying that there were several people matching this description, i.e. that it's a wide scale problem. Then you said that it's one specific person. Now you've admitted that he didn't actually commit the crime you've accused him of.

So, we're left with "There could be loads of foreigners who move to the UK as young children and then commit horrific crimes as adults, but we can't deport them". That's true - there might be. Then again, there might not be. I think facts take precedence over feelings, but apparently you "CBA" with that.

[malvolio]

If you're talking about a specific case, do you have more details? I can't find anything online about a rapist who couldn't be deported because he didn't speak Polish. The nearest I could find is some articles about a drug dealer who's lived in the UK since he was 4:
Polish drug dealer avoids deportation because he ‘does not speak the language’

OK, imperfect recollection. Possibly I CBA to do forensic research on every post.

Doesn't invalidate the actual point though, does it? But hey much easier to pick on trivial detail rather than engage in the debate itself.

[hobnob]

No, I said "Can't speak polish". That is why a judge prevented him being deported back to Poland....

If you're talking about a specific case, do you have more details? I can't find anything online about a rapist who couldn't be deported because he didn't speak Polish. The nearest I could find is some articles about a drug dealer who's lived in the UK since he was 4:
Polish drug dealer avoids deportation because he ‘does not speak the language’

[malvolio]

I assume you mean "who can't speak English"?

If these people are convicted criminals, I assume they would be sentenced in the same way as British criminals. The question is then whether they stay in a UK prison for their sentence or get deported early. See:
Foreign criminals to be deported quicker - GOV.UK
Either way, they won't be roaming the streets, until/unless their sentence is over.

No, I said "Can't speak polish". That is why a judge prevented him being deported back to Poland....

Not to mention the convicted paedophile who can't be deported because it would interfere with his right to a family life (despite never seeing his wife and children) and a dozen similar egregious examples.

Of course, all such examples may be only partially true and not simply black and white* - but it does show a worrying trend.


* Don't tell SKB I said that

[hobnob]

we will continue to be stuck with Polish rapists who can't speak Polish.

I assume you mean "who can't speak English"?

If these people are convicted criminals, I assume they would be sentenced in the same way as British criminals. The question is then whether they stay in a UK prison for their sentence or get deported early. See:
Foreign criminals to be deported quicker - GOV.UK
Either way, they won't be roaming the streets, until/unless their sentence is over.

[cojak]

clear as in totaly opaque then.

as for your racist crap. i'll take is as read from you.

And you need to debate better than shout 'RACIST' at other posters.

[cojak]

Not quite what they are saying, but near enough. Labour have already raised stupid opposition to the idea it will never happen, so they are clearly happy to let the UK be ruled by judges rather than Parliament.

Except that judges only interpret the laws legislated by Parliament, so if they are interpreting crap laws Parliament needs to write and vote on better laws.

You are one step away from labelling judges as 'enemies of the people'.

But you have not argued in a racist way, so there is that.

[malvolio]

clear as in totaly opaque then.

as for your racist crap. i'll take is as read from you.

Where in here or anywhere else have I said anything racist? I find that genuinely insulting.

I'm getting seriously pissed off with your nonsense remarks. Either engage properly or stick to posting other people's unfunny memes.

[sadkingbilly]

perfectly clear
Equally clearly

we will continue to be stuck with Polish rapists who can't speak Polish.

As for the grammar, "to" is a typo for "so". A million apologies for causing a failure of comprehension.

clear as in totaly opaque then.

as for your racist crap. i'll take is as read from you.

[sadkingbilly]

so
' to the idea it will never happen,'
becomes
' so the idea it will never happen,'
which is still a mess.

[malvolio]

to the idea? or it not happening? or what?
can't you post in English?

It is English, and perfectly clear to any with a modicum of historical knowledge. Labour are saying the Tory plan won't work because it breaks the Human Rights laws embodied in the UK by the Blair government. We can ignore the EU Human Rights law, but we can't ignore our own. Which is not unreasonable.

Equally clearly, the option of changing UK's laws is clearly not worth considering...

And since most of the issues around controlling immigration and - more importantly - deportation are driven by Human Rights lawyers, both practising or elevated to the Bench, and our government is lead by such a lawyer who prefers international law to our own, nothing is going to change, and we will continue to be stuck with Polish rapists who can't speak Polish.

As for the grammar, "to" is a typo for "so". A million apologies for causing a failure of comprehension.