RayC

The EU has deals with Libya and Turkiye to try and stem the flow of illegal migrants. How successful these initiatives have been - and whether they represent 'value for money' - is debatable Unfortunately, there do not appear to be any easy solutions.

Is France happy to be rid of illegal migrants? Possibly but it appears that the same charge could be levied against the UK. In any event, France isn't usually the first 'safe' European country where illegal migrants land. More often than not, it is either Greece or Italy. There are effectively two choices: 1) The rest of Europe turns it back and says to Greece and Italy, "your problem". In such a case, I would suggest that a likely natural response from the Italian and Greek authorities would be to let those illegal migrants who were simply transiting though their countries en route to somewhere else, to do so unopposed 2) Europe accepts that it is a continent-wide problem and attempts to find a cooperative solution to the problem.

Map location https://maps.app.goo.gl/8jhpz1Um1NP6btr98

If you are in the Banglampoo/ Pra Nakorn area, there is a photo shop on Thanon Samsen (between Soi 4 and 6). I've had photos done there for no end of visas for various countries and for a UK passport without any problems.

Yousaf wasn't dealt a great hand but he has played it very poorly. Seems to be a common trait amongst UK leaders recently.

Replace 'women' with 'men' and what do you get? A second pointless comment. Therefore, what? Weinstein must be innocent?

I don't consider the current US Administration to be fascist but even if it is, the American electorate can rid themselves of it in November. The same cannot be said for the Russian electorate. Please don't suggest that there was the opportunity to do so in the recent Russian election. It was neither free nor fair.

A completely different issue which has little to do with your original implied contention that Ukrainians were questioning their commitment to what you refer to as .. : "vile, corrupt politicians and oligarchs?". I pointed out that the same charge could be levied against Russians.

Bottom line is if you try to claim that you are living in the UK when, in fact, you are living in a country where pensions are frozen, you are commenting fraud. What penalty is levied seems to depend on the whim of the DWP (and the courts).

That seems to contradict the text in the link. Maybe the law re benefit fraud has changed since he was caught out of perhaps, he was just unlucky?🤷

Good. Pleased that we cleared that up!

It is clearly fraudulent. What is unclear is what the repercussions might be Whilst the link makes plain that an individual's pension cannot be stopped or reduced, It is also clear from the first section that they have committed fraud if they did not report that they have moved to a country where the pension is frozen. Given that, I would imagine that the DWP would freeze the pension at its' existing rate. The DWP may also decide to prosecute the individual concerned although, in the circumstances, I'd suggest that there is the strong possibility that the DWP might think it is more trouble than it is worth.

How am I playing whataboutery? I was clear: I'll shed no tears for Alid - or anyone else who practises violence in the name of their God - whatever fate befalls them. However, take a look at the posts in this thread and others. Many posters tar everyone with the same brush with the implicit message, 'If you are Muslim you are an extremist'. I'm merely pointing out that is not the case and things are a bit more nuanced.

I know little about theology - and have little desire to deepen my knowledge - but is it really the case that the old rules (Old Testament?) are utterly irrelevant to Christians? A cursory Google search threw up the following extract penned by an American evangelist: "Both the Old and New Testaments make up the Word of God. The New Testament was never given to replace the Old Testament but rather to complete its story." You might counter that this by suggesting this is a minority view? However, the point is that there are different interpretations of what it means to be a Christian. Why can't the same logic be applied to Muslims (and the Koran) rather than paint the totality of the religion - and all those who follow it - as evil? I've never met a rabbi but I've had friends and acquaintances of various faiths (Buddhists, Christians, Judaism, Muslims). Some I thought clever and decent; others less so. No idea what that proves if anything.

"If your very own brother, or your son or daughter, or the wife you love, or your closest friend secretly entices you, saying, “Let us go and worship other gods” (gods that neither you nor your ancestors have known, gods of the peoples around you, whether near or far, from one end of the land to the other), do not yield to them or listen to them. Show them no pity. Do not spare them or shield them. You must certainly put them to death. Your hand must be the first in putting them to death, and then the hands of all the people." From the Bible and the Torah (Deuterocanonical 13) To be clear, I am not acting as an apologist for Ahmed Alid: I won't shed any tears if he had an unfortunate accident whilst in custody. I am simply pointing that Islam doesn't have a monopoly on violence in the name of religion.

Absolutely tangential tosh. From the NATO website: "NATO's purpose is to guarantee the freedom and security of its members through political and military means". It's pretty obvious that a conflict taking place on the borders of some of its member states' is very much a legitimate cause for NATO concern, especially when the main antagonist is the very same expansionist State which NATO was set up to counter.

Russia - despite your ceaseless attempts to suggest otherwise - had no legitimate reason to invade Ukraine. I'm sure that Poland and the Baltic States are reassured by the security that being NATO members brings, but who can blame them being worried by Russia's illegal actions in Ukraine? It's not just this invasion, it's also the illegal annexation of Crimea and support of terrorists in the Donbass. Let's also not forget that Russia does have 'form' when it comes to occupying Poland and the Baltic States.

Millions of Russians seem to be asking themselves the same question.

Using radar based navigation systems, which now form part of the safety net when GPS is unavailable. Is flying under such conditions unsafe? Absolutely not but the use GPS data offers more precision. (I'll admit to some degree of hyperbole in my original post). Given the circumstances, Russia's jamming of GPS signals over Ukraine is understandable but in the Baltic? Were there NATO military manoeuvres being carried out in the area? If not, the only reason for jamming GPS signals would be to disrupt civil activity. So far as aviation - and other forms of transport - is concerned, the risk to life by doing so is negligible but it is not non-existent.

And perhaps it wasn't? In any event, even though the US are the paymasters of NATO, the US President cannot make guarantees on behalf of NATO.

Facts have never been a strong suite for Putin's apologists. In the article, Seamus Milne seems to think that a referendum held whilst the region was under Russian occupation (in Crimea) has some legitimacy. Yeah, right. There was no NATO promise not to expand eastwards. The Maidan coup was the culmination of an uprising against President Yanukovych, who decided to unilaterally revoke the will of the Ukrainian parliament (and people) by refusing to sign the EU-Ukraine Association Agreement.

So it's perfectly ok for Russia to interfere with aviation communication channels, thus endangering the lives of thousands of innocent civilians?

Pot/kettle. When did you live in London? When did you last even visit the city or the country for that matter? You are the one continually making negative comparisons between your perceived image of today's London and the London of your past.

I'll defer to you regarding champagne tasting parties - not my bag - and Islington's the 'wrong' side of the river for me. You're on a loser if you want to indulge in a pissing contest re our relative knowledge and experience of South London. My Mum's family were market traders in Waterloo for as far back as I can trace. I was born and brought up in Brixton in the '70s when the area was less gentrified than it is now. Although I moved away in the mid-80s, my parents continued to live there until they died in last decade. My wife and I now use Brixton as a base when we are in London. Bottom line: To use the old clique. I've forgotten more about Lambeth, Southwark and Lewisham than you could ever have hoped to have learnt during your 3 years living there.

You cannot prosecute an individual for holding anti-Semitic thoughts and beliefs, but if those thoughts or beliefs are expressed in word or deed then the individual could, quite rightly, be prosecuted under the provisions of the Hate Crime law. https://www.met.police.uk/advice/advice-and-information/hco/hate-crime/what-is-hate-crime/