ESC
Welcome to immigrationboards.com!
Moderators: Casa, John, ChetanOjha, archigabe, CR001, push, JAJ, ca.funke, Amber, zimba, vinny, Obie, EUsmileWEallsmile, batleykhan, meself2, geriatrix, Administrator
And the government is notoriously useless at removing people. It won't remove someone you grass up. It won't remove me if I go and report myself at a police station. And, as you know, it won't even remove people it has already caught and put in jail. Even if they are murderers!Failed asylum seekers are not illegal immigrants. They are people who are subject to removal but have not yet been removed.
I did not see any relevant to what we are discussing now. This is a free forum and everyone has the right to raise his voice. You do not have the right to tell the people to shut up, do not you. Memebers could post their opinion as long as as they stick to the rules.angelus wrote:Adindaz,
Perhaps you should try living without a passport or bank account for a week or two maybe some common sense will reach you then and you will keep your mouth shut for good reason
angie
Why did not they just return to their own country ????? You know, UK government is even offer to pay for it ???.angelus wrote:
Illegals are prone to abuse and crime like no other residents, when someone jumps you on the street - you woulnd't go to police to get the statement done, you'll just accept and live with that - at times it can be a really hard thing to do
OL7MAX wrote:How do you know that? It's commonly accepted that the majority are overstayers (i.e. came on completely legal documents).majority GOT FRAUDULENT DOCUMENTS
There is no connection between overstaying and fake documents. If an overstayer asks for an NI number and is given one it's not a fake document. Similarly with licence etc. Most proper, legal documents in the UK can be achieved without faking anything.But they already know that if they become overstyer they coudl easily find someone to fake their documents.
Who said this is a fake document. You get NI number once you are a legal residents and you have this number for rest of your life, irrespectively of your status, legal, illegel, bogus or whatever it is.OL7MAX wrote: If an overstayer asks for an NI number and is given one it's not a fake document.
As I mentioned before, if these people are genuine then they should come up. They will be treated as a victim rather then a criminal. This case has happned for sex slave victim. The truth will come ot in the court of justice.OL7MAX wrote: It doesn't matter if these people were locked up, raped, made to work as prostitutes. It doesn't matter if their entire family was killed and they are scared to go back.
You. You are the one who said that majority got (sic) fake documents. And you now realise that this may not be true.Who said this is a fake document.
No, they won't. They have to fit very specific criteria - like qualify under WP, under 10 year rule, under 14 year rule etc. Even if they do qualify they won't get stay unless they have extensive documentation to prove lots of things. Even if they have extensive documentation under a 14 year rule the HO can bring out one piece of paper from anytime in the last 14 years (deportation order) and their entire case will be thrown out. If they don't have a case in law they can still drag it out by appealing and appealing but they will eventually get thrown out.They will be treated as a victim rather then a criminal.
Adindas may have told that a majority of the illegal immigrants do obtain fraudulent documents, but have never even uttered that all the NI number is obtained fraudulantly. In fact it was you who have put the implication down that adindas considers all the NI to have obtained fraudulantly. Actually it should be noted that adindas never claimed that the majority of the documents that the illegal immigrant acquires are fake, but rather just that the majority do get fake documents. Which means getting even a single fake document would qualify, whatever it be. I personally do not know whether to believe that the majority did or did not get the fake documents until a statistical evidence to substantiate either claim is obtained.You. You are the one who said that majority got (sic) fake documents. And you now realise that this may not be true.
Over 100,000 so called illegal immigrants came here as kids under their parents' asylum or other application. They went to school here, made friends here, took up jobs and found partners. Some of them never even knew their status became illegal (when their parents overstayed). What is your contention - that they are such dangerous "criminals" that you should cross the road when you see them?
There are grandmothers who came here legally before World War II from places like Canada and the US, are technically "illegal immigrants", and don't know it. Their kids born and brought up here - and many of them grandparents themselves - are also technically "illegal". Also, see my previous example of kids of overstayers. In case you are unaware it is not possible for a minor to commit the crime of "overstaying".
It is necessary to make a clear distiction between an overstayer and an illegal immigrant. A person caught up in the hypothetical position as above will become an over stayer and not an illegal immigrant. Common sense tells us that most of the illegal immigrants had the criminal intent of being an illegal immigrant right from the beginning whether or not they break any other law while an overstayer need not have such a distinction. You have to be hard pressed to find a good human rights lawyer who could easily overturn any decision if it was made by the Home Office against the comatose man provided that there are medical proof to the substantiate the claim.If you fall comatose today and your visa expires tomorrow you become an illegal immigrant within the next 24 hours - and there's nothing you can do about it.
Do you really believe yourself, let alone make others believe it as well that it would matter less to these "insufferable lovey" to people being raped, being prostituted and being killed just because they are illegal immigrants or overstayers? Why do you us extreme examples and half truths with the hope of coercing people to agree with you when it is painfully clear that reality is nothing as you paint it to be.It doesn't matter if these people were locked up, raped, made to work as prostitutes. It doesn't matter if their entire family was killed and they are scared to go back.
Dont miss the emphasis: The majority of "illegal immigrants" got fraudulent documents intentionally. Don't miss the context: it was in relation to coming here, not continuing to stay here. He is wrong, of course, as he was oblivious to the fact that a large percentage came legally and overstayed. Or - tell us the facts - was he right in his claim that the majority came here by conning the UK government? Any links to Home Office figures on how many conned their way?Again there is no doubt there a very tiny proportion in this category. However, majority GOT FRAUDULENT DOCUMENTS BECAUSE THEY INTEND TO DO THAT AND THUS KNOW IT FROM THE BEGINNING.
Actually, it's not. "Jobs" is not a finite quantity and many immigrants, like me, actually create jobs. Do you realise how many other jobs these immigrants create simply by being here and spending the money they earn? This an economic issue, though, and out of the scope of the thread. But yours is the typical Daily Mail hysterical, lynch mob mindset. Why let facts get in the way of good, old fashioned, communal angst? A job taken by an "illegal immigrant" is not one job less for anyone else.the fact remains a job taken up by an illegal immigrant or an overstayer without the proper authorisation is a job stolen from the legal immigrants
I agree with you that the UK justice system can be very "independent" sometimes ... and that irks the government in power. However, I must disabuse you of your claim that peopl will be treated as victims or that in some way "truth" in a court of law will mean sympathy for the really deserving. It doesn't work that way. Courts can't apply sympathy, they can only apply the law.Take for example Afghan Hi-Jackers
OL7MAX wrote:
I agree with you that the UK justice system can be very "independent" sometimes ... and that irks the government in power. However, I must disabuse you of your claim that peopl will be treated as victims or that in some way "truth" in a court of law will mean sympathy for the really deserving. It doesn't work that way. Courts can't apply sympathy, they can only apply the law.
Those who have a case in law will end up winning. Those that don't have a case can argue interpretations and appeal and appeal and appeal and drag things out. That's certainly a "feature" here in the UK. But if they still can't prove they've got a case they will not get ILR no matter what the compassionate circumstances. They won't get ILR "simply because" they were raped and made into sex slaves. They will have to prove under which current category they have the right to stay. It's unlikely they will qualify under the 10 year rule. It's almost impossible they'll have the documents to win a 14 year application. So, if there is no torture/execution risk in their home countries they will be deported.
Same applies to cockle pickers, BTW. And people who came here as minors and always believed they were legal.
Crucially: Would you oppose compassionate amnesty for any of the above?
Rawling wrote:
OL7MAX has put very good case and try to show Adindas how the whole situation is complicated and cannot be reduced to simplicity like the way he see it. But he never really come back with any satisfactory answer. He just insist on word illegal. Anyway Mr Adindas can you tell us on your opinion what is the best way to solve the current situation. Bear in mind all situation which OL7MAX have mention.
Read all my postings do not just take a snapshot. You will see that my position is about justice, honesty and fair system. I concern about genuine asylum seekers.thirdwave wrote:I find it surprising that Adindas, being a recent immigrant himself, holds views on immigration that one would usually associate with the far right. Although I agree uncontrolled immigration can be damaging & tighter border controls are needed, targetting asylum seekers is not the answer..rather, the developed world should look at the reasons why these people want to leave their countries in the first place & work towards addressing them (eg: the recent G8 initiative to alleviate poverty in Africa)
Your stetement here is irrelevant, we are not discussing medical term, are not we ? Discuss medical term with your collegues not here because this is an immigration forum. If I was not considering the rule of this forum I would have done personal attack like what you did.thirdwave wrote: I wonder if Adindas is a former asylum seeker himself...In psychodynamic terms, such attitudes could be described as a 'reaction formation'
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reaction_formation
