johnnybangkok

Those in glass houses........

You have literally just confirmed what I was trying to say. By your own admission you have witnessed it with your own eyes having owned several bars and restaurants, therefore you are surrounded in an environment that probably sees a far greater proportion of trouble then someone who say runs a flower shop. And the examples I gave were to demonstrate time. There was huge problems with the 'youth' in the 60's though Mods & Rockers, football hooligans in the 70's and 80's and gang violence thereafter. To say it is worse now just negates all the social issues of the past - of which there was plenty and for which they have been going on for decades. The older generation typically bemoan the younger generation whilst conveniently forgetting the problems that occurred whilst they were growing up. That's what I was meaning.

“No, a British citizen does not need £65,000 to sponsor their Thai wife for a UK Spouse Visa. The minimum income requirement is £29,000 per year, or £88,500 in cash savings held for at least 6 months.” ok?

What part are we not getting? Yes you have to prove that you can sustain you and your wife and that you are not going to be a burden to the state (because she is Thai after all) but if you can’t do that then you personally can still go back. Obviously no government is going to let a penniless national rock up with a bint from Nana and expect to pay for her but the requirements are reasonable and achievable.

What are you talking about? Seriously stop making up nonsense. Your Thai wife is still YOUR wife. Perhaps you might have to jump through a few more hoops to prove that but she still remains YOUR wife so if you want to go back to the UK, there’s nothing they can do to stop you. You’re just making up nonsense or you are literally daft enough to believe the cr@p people are feeding you. You don’t need this imaginary 65k you keep cr@pping on about. It’s all in your head and if I may be so bold, you should perhaps have it looked at.

Of course you are. Birds of a feather and all that.

https://migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources/commentaries/family-fortunes-the-uks-new-income-requirement-for-partner-visas/ Yeah ‘cos Googling is hard.

No you’re not. You have a British passport which made setting up a new life in Thailand very easy. If you need to head back you can walk straight into the country without proving anything to anyone. If you need any government assistance you automatically get it (with some means testing of course) and you don’t face stigma, racism, Islamophobia or anything derogatory. All this “woe is me” is self inflicted. All this idea that someone less fortunate than yourself somehow gets better treatment is just right wing propaganda. You’re white, you’re British. Count your blessings and stop moaning about others who are just trying to get by.

Google is your friend - “No, refugees in the UK do not need to have 65,000 GBP in savings to bring their family members to the UK. While there are requirements for demonstrating financial stability, there is no fixed minimum savings amount. Refugees need to show they have sufficient funds to support themselves and their family without relying on public funds. Here's a more detailed explanation: Financial Stability Requirements: Refugees seeking to bring their family members to the UK must demonstrate that they have sufficient funds to support themselves and their family. This is typically assessed based on their income, assets, and any other forms of financial support they may have. No Fixed Savings Threshold: Unlike some visa categories, there isn't a specific minimum savings amount that must be demonstrated. Instead, the focus is on demonstrating the overall financial stability and ability to support the family. “

And you were doing so well until this bunch of nonsense. The 'party of racist, sexist 2 tier justice?' whatever the hell that is. 'Of anti semitism, of rampant uncontrolled immigration' - simply untrue but we start to get to the heart of how you view the world with your 'anti white DEI policies' as if you are somehow, miraculously less in this world because of those damned 'people of colour'. And finally 'wars based on WMD lies' - talk about living in the past. That WAS Blair and maybe that left you with such a foul taste it still resonates now but it was over 20 years ago so maybe try and get over it.

Yeah because that's exactly what you what from the leader of the most powerful nation on earth - a troll. I think I'd prefer a diplomat, a unifier and a statesman. But yeah, we get 'troll level 1,000' and you seem to think it's hilarious.

And good to see that after several years on the forum you haven’t changed a bit from your right-wing, myopic approach to politics, summed up completely as “lefties bad!” Unlike yourself I can change my opinion based on new facts presented and although I am certainly more left leaning, I can criticise when criticism is merited and hold ALL political parties to account. You should try it yourself now and again.

And you call me myopic. Every singly one of the things you reckon “millions” of Muslims regularly do are illegal under UK law, yet you profess that “millions” of Muslims do these illegal things. Is that daily, weekly or just at the weekends? There are 3.9 million Muslims in the UK so by your estimates the vast majority of them are committing serious crimes on a regular basis and I suppose not being held to account by the law? Do you even hear yourself when spouting this much drivel? I’m done with you and your very obvious Islamophobia and your even more obvious one sided, bigoted view. There’s no objectivity and there’s certainly no desire to understand. What a terribly sad way of looking at the world.

I'm British and regularly go back to the UK (in fact I'm off there again in 3 weeks). I also still have a flat in Whitechapel, one of the most muslim dominated areas of London. I have plenty of muslim friends and they have integrated very well thank you very much and very much consider themselves as English. Perhaps Bradford, Huddersfield and Rotherham (I don't know, haven't been there for a while) have issues but these isues are exagerated by the likes of Reform who (like yourself) are all about pointing out differences rather than commonality in an attempt to be relevant. No one is advocated for illegal immigrants. This something people like yourself love to conflate because in your mind since I'm pointing out the demonisation of immigrants I must condone illegal immigrants. I don't. I'm just pointing out this 'it's all the immigrants fault' is purile and frankly stupid. It's an issue (no one again is denying this) but in the grander scheme of things I would suggest large corporations not paying their fair share of tax or billionaires hiding their money off-shore or increases in N.I. contributions or doing away with fuel allowances for pensioners or the continued privitisation of the NHS (something Farage has openly admitted to wanting) are FAR more serious issues than illegal immigrants. But you just stick to your right wing talking points, decry us all as 'Gaurdian reading lefties' if it plays more to your echo chamber. I don't think for one minute I'm going to change your mind - because it's just easier for you to demonise rather than accept the nuances involved.

It's truly something to behold the amount of mental gymnastics required to try and defend Trump by all you fanboys. As WorriedNoodle clearly points out, these are NOT gang tattoos and obviously the picture Trump presented as 'proof' is a photoshopped 'interpretation' of them - yet here you are with your 'But the meaning of the tats is rather clear.' No they are not. They do not mean he is a member of MS13 or any other gang for that matter so any chance any of you fanboys can just simply admit Trump got it wrong and needs to do something (on SCOTUS orders) to get this man back? Of course not, there's always a whataboutism or a deflection to go before any of you lot will ever admit that Trump is a manipulative idiot who will do ANYTHING to try and fool you all. And fool you he does. Every. Single. Day.