youreavinalaff

No, I didn't. You missed that it won't be "Every" voting mother and father. However, if the "darling child" in your comment was sarcasm, I agree. 😅😅 I don't think it's an own goal, not yet anyway. If it's announced those entering uni or those in full-time employment are exempt, I think there's milage in the plan.

You clearly haven't read the report.

I know you often fail to grasp simple English but this example really takes the biscuit. Another poster and I were discussing "How it might work" not "If it works" or "If it's working" A fundamental difference noticeable to all, with the exception of trolls.

If you can't see it, I hope those you trained are no longer in service. If they are, the security of UK is in deep sh$#. Try again. Here's my reasoning: "What I do know is your comments are wide of the mark. Unless you know all nearly 18 year olds that it will affect, how many will choose the 12 month option and how many will then choose to enlist." Tell me you do know and I'll withrmdraw my comment of you being wide of the mark.

And? What's that got to do with my post?

Read my previous post.

I don't recall saying I had ideas. Then again, it's not up to me. What I do know is your comments are wide of the mark. Unless you know all nearly 18 year olds that it will affect, how many will choose the 12 month option and how many will then choose to enlist. How many years did you get involved with training those on national service?

Interesting. You know so much about how it's all going to work. I'd be in awe if you weren't wide of the mark.

A good idea if there are exceptions. Any 18 year old going to university or in full time employment, with time limits, need not go. That way, the lazy ones that come out of school and straight on the dole will, I'm sure, find work.

Well there you go then. SOME women. Just because is all women in your experience, doesn't mean it's all women in general. All it does is puts the spotlight on you.

SOME women are never satisfied with what they have and always want more or different.

That's fine. You'll be able to use it for ID on domestic flights. You won't be able to use it on international flights. I believe the passport is cancelled when your application is at processing stage.

On the contrary, your posts are relevant. Wide of the mark but relevant.

Not if you keep up with recent posts, including yours.

That goes without saying. All part of integrating.

It's only words. If any expat, even though a non immigrant, stays in Thailand for a decent amount of time, having had multiple extensions of stay and considers it as their home and where they live , they should make the effort to integrate.

Have you tried it in UK without document? I know people on visas in UK. All of them needed documents.

Oh dear. How sad. Never mind. I guess that's why you don't live in Thailand any more. Just because you got shafted, doesn't mean everyobe does. Maybe it was your attitude, just sayin'.

Your wish is granted. Illegals can't apply nor receive citizenship.

You are funny. You can't answer my question and you deny posting about race. Then you accuse me of all sorts of things. Real under the bridge stuff. Here's your post about race. Read and comprehend it before denying.

Actually, I was replying to another poster. The one that mentioned Somalia. Your comment had a list of murder and manslaughter convictions by race. Any answer to my question?

I apologise. I see that was another poster. My mistake, not gobbing off. However, you did comment about race. Any answer to my question?

No answer to my question? You brought up race by stating the Somali heritage. This thread is about immigration. How many of those 91 convicted are still deemed immigrants, in your opinion?

Ok. Legal non immigrants, with certain rights.

How many were UK citizens? How many were second, third or more generations? At what point, in your opinion, should people stop being considered immigrants?