Chomper Higgot

I quoted the Vienna Convention, to which the UK is a signatory. Would you like to try and address that with some facts?

Some people understand the UK is bound by the international treaties to which it is a signatory.

I’m sorry you don’t know how the law works.

Clearly Human Rights Law was not correctly addressed. Your bizarre accusation against the ECHR are noted.

World food supplies are currently under threat, particularly grains and edible oils. Thailand is a prominent exporter of these food staples. I suggest you plan for the Bht to strengthen.

History is littered with examples of abuse that was perfectly ‘legal’. Clearly the High Court did not consider the implications of Human Rights law in these cases. The UK is entitled to make any laws it wishes within the bounds of the international treaties to which it is a signatory. (Something this Government doesn’t understand).

This is yet another home goal for the UK. 1. Deliberately evading review by Independent Council. 2. Refusing to accept criticism from legal experts and members of their own party. 3. Choosing to attempt to proceed within one month of a formal judicial review of the ‘policy’

https://www.coe.int/en/web/conventions/full-list?module=signatures-by-treaty&treatynum=005

What needs to be proved is ‘Mens Rae’. Sworn testimony from the paid officials who job it was to advise the President of facts that he then ignored is a long way towards proving ‘Mens Rae’. Then going on to promote the ‘Big Lie’ seek and obtain $250 million from his supporters to ‘fight the Big Lie’ but instead pocket the money is an even easier path to proving ‘Mens Rae’ - there’s a money trail.

Utter nonsense. The FBI is a large organization dealing with a wide range of criminal activity committed by people across the whole of the US. Some agents specialize in Drug related crimes, some agents specialize in financial crimes, some agents specialize in crimes of child abuse and some agents specialize in the threat of domestic terrorism. Each reports through the management of their department. The FBI management report the findings of individual departments. The opinion of individual FBI agents is reported through the chain of command, their opinion on matters they are not dealing with is irrelevant. What a random FBI Agent thinks or does not think about a issue in which they have no involvement is not an argument against the findings of FBI reports.

People voted for the Tories on the basis of their manifesto, which did not include withdrawing from the ECHR. Lawyers don’t prevent the Government from doing anything. The Government is, like everyone else in the UK subject to the law, there are nations in which the Government is above the law, thankfully the UK is not yet one of them.

Or do what I do, pay my taxes and have absolutely no objection to a tiny fraction of my taxes being spent helping people in need.

Projection?

Johnson really is intent on destroying the international reputation of the UK. However, this particular piece of idiocy is handing his many enemies within the Tory party exactly the excuse they need to get rid of him.

ECHR orders flight cancelled: https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/jun/14/european-court-humam-right-makes-11th-hour-intervention-in-rwanda-asylum-seeker-plan

More than a bit oversized. Who cares, it’s only tax payer’s money.

A rather poor attempt at dragging your assumptions regarding the totally irrelevant nationality of other posters into discussion. Back to topic please.

Why would I pretend such a thing? Or, more precisely, why do you feel the need to suggest I would pretend such a thing?!

Even if it contained clauses to permit deporting refugees, since Brexit the UK is not a party to the Dublin Agreement.

I recommend you read Mrs Beeton’s recipe for Jugged Hare.

Once in the UK they are the UK’s responsibility, under UK law. This has always been the case.

If you are going to claim ‘bigger and better’ then shape and size absolutely do matter.

It seems the Government itself has taken steps to avoid confirmation on the matter: https://www.politicshome.com/news/article/minister-avoids-confirming-if-top-legal-advisor-was-consulted-on-northern-ireland-protocol-legislation

Correct: ” Article 46 Provisions of internal law regarding competence to conclude treaties 1.A State may not invoke the fact that its consent to be bound by a treaty has been expressed in violation of a provision of its internal law regarding competence to conclude treaties as invalidating its consent unless that violation was manifest and concerned a rule of its internal law of fundamental importance. 2.A violation is manifest if it would be objectively evident to any State conducting itself in the matter in accordance with normal practice and in good faith.”

Correct. Vienna Convention, Article 27.