Quizzes & Puzzles36 mins ago
Echr- World's Paedos Welcome In Britain
So, a Zimbabwean paedophile was allowed to stay in Britain because he would face "hostility" if he was deported back to his home country. Thank you ECHR.
An immigration tribunal judge blocked his deportation by the Home Office as it would breach his "rights" under Article 3 of the European Convention for Human Rights. The judge accepted his lawyers claims that, as an openly gay man who had been jailed for child sex offences, he was likely to face "substantial hostility". Now he's also been granted anonymity.
Isn't this reason in itself to get out of the ECHR once and for all?
Answers
1 to 16 of 16
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Sinead_O. 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.I saw that in this mornings Telegraph, Sinead. Absolutely sickening. Surely Keir Starmer who is always banging on about how tough he is on immigration and what an amazing lawyer he was can boot this scumbag out? Nah, lets give him anonymity and let him stay in the UK, after all he's only a paedophile. VOTE LABOUR.
What about our "human rights" not to have vermin living among us?
The ECHR may have started off as a human rights organ but it has been perverted into a support service for low live criminal scum by money grubbing lawyers. Abolish it and replace it with something that protects the human rights of the masses.
“That would have been part of what Brexit was about.”
‘Fraid not, OG. The ECHR has nothing to do with the EU (and vice versa). Those voting to leave should have been aware of that.
That said, the ECHR is an outdated institution which, ideally needs winding up entirely. That’s not likely to happen so the UK needs to withdraw from the Convention.
There is absolutely zero chance of that happening. Even if it wanted to do so, the Westminster government would need the approval of the three devolved governments and that is unlikely to be granted (particularly if, at the time, the devolved governments are ruled by a party not in power in Westminster).
More than that, the ECHR is inextricably linked with the ridiculous “Good Friday” agreement and that would have to be renegotiated (a process unlikely to be agreeable to our friends across the Irish Sea).
It would also require the redrafting and approval of the UK’s own Human Rights Act which also refers to the ECHR. In short, it would be placed in the “too difficult” tray.
In the past week or so there have been a number of decisions that went against the government’s responsibility to deport undesirable aliens from this country. Here’s a couple:
1. An Albanian who arrived here illegally and had £300,000 confiscated under a “proceeds of crime” order. He has been allowed to remain because the tribunal ruled it would be “unduly harsh” for his 10-year-old son to return to Albania with his father owing to food sensitivities, sensory issues and difficulties communicating emotions. Among the “food sensitivities” cited was he fact that he does not like the variety of chicken nuggets available in Albania:
2. Francisca Boateng, 42, won an immigration appeal after claiming that her ‘proxy’ marriage to a German citizen living in Britain had lasted long enough for her to qualify to remain. She met Fatao Sualihu, a German citizen, before returning home to divorce her then husband. She organised a ‘proxy’ wedding in Ghana in December 2018 that neither she nor her new husband attended. She moved to the UK to join her new husband, but the marriage broke down and they divorced in January 2022:
There was a further case reported yesterday of a 20 year old Portuguese man who had been convicted of a string of serious motoring offences which resulted in him receiving a 12 month prison sentence. Attempts to remove him from the UK failed as his two year old child requires specific care because of delayed speech development and signs of autism.
. usual sunday AB thread - where are the mods? why there they are ! piling in ! with their great big glooops of straight British common sense
phew
“That would have been part of what Brexit was about.”
‘Fraid not, OG. The ECHR has nothing to do with the EU (and vice versa). Those voting to leave should have been aware of that.
( and werent: see - TTT's many many er effusions on "oo-man rights".
Nudger (NJ) : I thought anything with the phrase "oo-man rights" in it was a load of ......"
“That would have been part of what Brexit was about.”
‘Fraid not, OG. The ECHR has nothing to do with the EU (and vice versa). Those voting to leave should have been aware of that.
dont foo-foo on their wheeties, this early in the morning - law and common sens is deffo NOT in order today
-- answer removed --
This is outrageous. If we hadnt already enough paedos of our own, we're now obliged by the E.C.H.R. to take them from elsewhere. Isnt there ANYONE left in the government or the judiciary who are willing to do something about this??? The sooner we get out of the ECHR the better, but would Labour do anything about it even if we werent bound by the ECHR? Why arent are all the Labour politicians, ministers and PM coming out and condemning this utterly outrageous decision??? And granting the pervert anonymity? No. Enough is enough.
It is decisions like these that actually give the REAL far-right a massive boost. If we really want to live in a Britain where common sense prevails and extremists of all persuasions stay out of power, we need politicians who have the guts to speak out against this sort of nonsense. If you were to give the British people a referendum on leaving the E.C.H.R. now, before the country gets irredeemably swamped by the offscouring of the world, there may be a faint glimmer of hope. But I fear we are maybe reaching the point of no return.
and if there were protests about this it would be considered right wing, id imagine counter protests with open borders and free palestine nerds, is it me or governments have let this country become lawless with these laws and treaties, was it well meaning in the first place, or perhaps had a hidden agenda like err very rewarding for the human rights law firms.
1 to 16 of 16
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.