Quizzes & Puzzles0 min ago
One Of The Biggest Problems This Contry Faces
8 Answers
And yet all four only face a totall of 14 years max for allof them.
Country has gone to the dogs.
http:// www.dai lymail. co.uk/n ews/art icle-55 75109/H ome-Off ice-off icial-r inglead er-ille gal-imm igratio n-scam. html
Country has gone to the dogs.
http://
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by youngmafbog. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.Glad they've been convicted. The sentence is max of 14 years for each of them rather than the total of their 4 sentences. Shame it wasn't more and money wasn't recovered but I assume it's within the sentencing guidelines. Let's hope it deters others but I think the prospects of making a fortune will persuade others to try/continue.
"How is an home office official suppose to look"
Well one would expect them not to look like a tramp.
"The sentence is max of 14 years for each of them rather than the total of their 4 sentences."
Hope your right, the problem is the DM does have a habit of lumping all sentences together. It's not clear from this article.
Well one would expect them not to look like a tramp.
"The sentence is max of 14 years for each of them rather than the total of their 4 sentences."
Hope your right, the problem is the DM does have a habit of lumping all sentences together. It's not clear from this article.
"Iqbal’s co-accused were Sheikh Muhammad Usman, 45, legal case worker Mohammad Khawar Aftab Hussain , 49, and worker Mohammad Ibrahim Ali, 48"
Isn't it a strange coincidence that they all have such foreign sounding names?
Could there be some kind of pattern here?
Could any conclusions (or even an hypothesis) be drawn?
note to self - must give this some serious thought
Isn't it a strange coincidence that they all have such foreign sounding names?
Could there be some kind of pattern here?
Could any conclusions (or even an hypothesis) be drawn?
note to self - must give this some serious thought
Who is responsible, within our civil services, for granting positions of trust to people who show scant regard for the security and interest of our Country? It is nothing short of sedition, and a deliberate subversion of Britain conducted by our conductors of forced inclusion in the name of diversity. I do not trust any of the newcomers, from certain distant parts, to show the slightest degree of honesty. Corruption is a way of life whence they come. I will not use business premises that are "controlled" by them, and certainly never use a debit card on premises staffed by them when I find myself forced to, for instance, buy petrol at a filling station. I would not, either, use the contactless option under any circumstances at a till staffed by them.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.