Just now, josephbloggs said:

They'd been at sea for close to 36 hours on a rubber dinghy.

With a monstrous multi-ship international rescue/aid/assistance convoy nursing them along

They are not in danger, they are dangerous😅

1 minute ago, Palatus said:

I get your "can't understand" dilemma must be frustrating for you to figure things out, but crimes such as criminal damage to the dinghy, endangering life at sea / endangering a rescue worker, and interference with a rescue operation under maritime law comes to mind.

Funny enough I can't see the Human Traffickers who purchased the dinghy turning up in a UK Court as witnesses

Just now, Will B Good said:

No idea.....I imagine legally. With their qualifications UNHCR would have singled them out.

You would think so but I doubt it. Unless you consider criminal activity as a qualification. An apparent word from someone in the Home Office, and it may not be true, only 1% have valid reasons to be considered an refugee

56 minutes ago, 23RD said:

What crime could he be charged with?

Destroying the property of criminal crime syndicates and human Traffickers?

Preventing illegal immigration?

Attempted murder, GBH, endangering life at sea, possession of a weapon.......bearing in mind his "previous", I'm not too sure "Tommo" has fully thought this through.

Problem is, that when you fail to tackle a serious issue that is emotive, socially/culturally threatening, and controversial, then you provide fertile ground for extremes from either side to thrive... don't kick the can down the road and let it fester, be decisive, as outcomes are worse and the medicine to fix it gets stronger, and more difficult to swallow, as time goes by.

This can be laid squarely at the door of spineless European politicians afraid to make hard decisions that the rest of the world makes without a second thought... serious malfunction and will be Europe's downfall.

The answers are to be found in the middle, as usual. There are two types of immigration, the right type and the wrong type. The UK needs skilled, law-abiding, productive, qualified, tax-paying, and those who can contribute types... however, we don't need the wrong type that are nothing other than toxic to society and a criminal liability. The UK could learn from Denmark and a few others, and if they can do it, then so can the UK.

The Danish PM Federiksen said that immigrants cannot come to Denmark, commit serious crimes, and expect that it is a human right to stay... and her party is center left. She also said that Denmark's world-class healthcare system cannot continue as is for Danes if they allow too many in... fair do really.

Edited September 23Sep 23 by Sir Dude
Typos

8 minutes ago, Will B Good said:

You said the anecdote was similar.....not the couple.......???

No - I said every leftist has a similar anecdote. Not an identical one.

They normally involve meeting doctors and engineers at dinner parties. Yours, a neurosurgeon and cardiologist was a neighbour. 😄 🤔

11 minutes ago, josephbloggs said:

They'd been at sea for close to 36 hours on a rubber dinghy.

Couldn't care less to be honest.

Their choice, why didn't the French help, sea was a mill pond, tying up unnecessary life saving assets. No lives at risk.

Stuff them.......

13 minutes ago, Will B Good said:

No idea.....I imagine legally. With their qualifications UNHCR would have singled them out.

Nobody would argue with that then, no real point of mentioning them really as this thread is about illegal chancers.

16 minutes ago, Will B Good said:

Yes, I imagine they were legal..............there are no legal routes which allow individuals to apply for asylum, if outside the UK........you have to be, in effect, chosen by an organisation UKRS, ARAP.......or "get yourself into the UK", hence the small boats.

Why are they seeking asylum.......................from France ?

54 minutes ago, 23RD said:

What crime could he be charged with?

Destroying the property of criminal crime syndicates and human Traffickers?

Preventing illegal immigration?

Several crimes:

1. Being thick as mince.

2. Grifting.

3. Inducing vomit with his faux "I'm so religious and a good Christian" persona.

4. Drug dealing, kidnapping a completely innocent person at knifepoint (oh wait, he already got charged for that one, and even the judge recognised his minceness: saying it was "extraordinarily frightening"and was "matched only by its stupidity")

5. Puncturing a boat on the open seas whilst there were rescue personnel on it. Pretty sure that could be quite a serious one.

Same as Yaxely-Lennon. It is all calculated, they've weighed up the bit of prison time they'll have to serve versus how many donations will pour in to enrich them and keep them in luxury foreign homes, fancy holidays and copious amounts of cocaine. And we already have one sap on this forum wanting to chip in.

Seriously, the boat had been at sea for 36 hours. They were rescued and transferred. The boats are then inspected, taken to shore, analysed to follow the supply chain, then destroyed. Yet Tommo Thicko decided to slash it with a rescue worker on it.

This technically could fall under Piracy on The High Seas, a global definition under Article 101 of the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.

https://www.un.org/depts/los/piracy/piracy_legal_framework.htm

I seriously hope he has miscalculated his punishment vs donations on this one. Violent, disgusting, racist, criminal. When even Farage and Jenrick speak out against you it really says something.

Edited September 23Sep 23 by josephbloggs

9 minutes ago, Will B Good said:

Attempted murder, GBH, endangering life at sea, possession of a weapon..

Attempted murder of an empty dinghy?

GBH on who?

Just now, 23RD said:

Attempted murder of an empty dinghy?

GBH on who?

So there was rescuer on the boat like it says in the report?

GBH: using a knife during the commission of a violent act

5 minutes ago, Nick Carter icp said:

Why are they seeking asylum.......................from France ?

I given.....why were they?

17 minutes ago, Palatus said:

I get your "can't understand" dilemma must be frustrating for you to figure things out, but crimes such as criminal damage to the dinghy, endangering life at sea / endangering a rescue worker, and interference with a rescue operation under maritime law comes to mind.

1 minute ago, Will B Good said:

So there was rescuer on the boat like it says in the report?

GBH: using a knife during the commission of a violent act

The guy jumped on the boat and made no attempt to get off despite 2 boats next to him.

Looks more like a suicide attempt to me.

Edited September 23Sep 23 by sungod

6 minutes ago, sungod said:

Nobody would argue with that then, no real point of mentioning them really as this thread is about illegal chancers.

Where in the thread title does it say illegal chancers......or does your mind immediately convert the written word into what you would like it say?

Just now, Will B Good said:

Where in the thread title does it say illegal chancers......or does your mind immediately convert the written word into what you would like it say?

Nowhere, I made it up like you do with most of your posts.

13 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

No - I said every leftist has a similar anecdote. Not an identical one.

They normally involve meeting doctors and engineers at dinner parties. Yours, a neurosurgeon and cardiologist was a neighbour. 😄 🤔

I know.....I was there..........🙄

1 hour ago, Will B Good said:

We had a married Syrian couple move in next door to us........we didn't know them socially, by pure chance we were moving out........he was a neurosurgeon and his wife was a cardiologist.

That's two out of how many? If you're trying to project that personal anecdote as normal I'd say it was a massive fail.

Just now, sungod said:

Nowhere, I made it up like you do with most of your posts.

Most posts are made up.....few, if any, pre-exist, unless copy and paste......what are your wittering on about?

2 minutes ago, Will B Good said:

I know.....I was there..........🙄

Of course you were Will...

Course you were... 😄

1 minute ago, Tippaporn said:

That's two out of how many? If you're trying to project that personal anecdote as normal I'd say it was a massive fail.

Why do you think I'm trying to project that as normal............it was simply a truthful anecdote told in passing......

Calm down and don't post if it's your time of the month. Leave it a week.

1 minute ago, JonnyF said:

Of course you were Will...

Course you were... 😄

Thank you for that kind confirmation.

30 minutes ago, Will B Good said:

Yes, I imagine they were legal..............there are no legal routes which allow individuals to apply for asylum, if outside the UK........you have to be, in effect, chosen by an organisation UKRS, ARAP.......or "get yourself into the UK", hence the small boats.

You are correct.

There are no legal routes to apply for UK asylum from outside the UK. Under United Kingdom immigration law, an individual cannot apply for asylum from overseas, as you must be physically present in the UK or at a UK port of entry to lodge an official asylum claim. There is no "asylum visa" that permits travel to the country for this purpose.

I don't know about anyone else but to be a country that accepts asylum seekers but offers no route other than to land illegally seems to be, well, stupid. Or, it's purposely set up that way. Hmm . . . let me think about which it might be.

3 minutes ago, Will B Good said:

Thank you for that kind confirmation.

No problem Will.

The Afghan brain surgeon and his Iranian rocket scientist wife who just purchased the 200,000,000 USD penthouse adjacent to mine and popped round unannounced to make me a refreshing Pina Colada confirmed you were no doubt telling the truth. 😄

2 hours ago, Will B Good said:

He has previously demonstrated he's pretty handy with a knife...........

He was sentenced to two years in prison after pleading guilty to an attempted kidnapping at knifepoint. He forced his way into a man's home on Hayling Island accusing him of stealing his drugs.

Worse than that, it was the wrong bloke who suffered the home invasion. The court didn't address whether he got his £10,000 back (that's the stated value of the missing drugs, this wasn't just the odd ounce for smoking).

While protesting on the beach at Plymouth, he threatened to get deeper into the sea if the police approach. During his live stream, he stated he was going to swim home, and that he was a good swimmer as he got all his "badges at school". So obviously, he's a master mariner.

47 minutes ago, sungod said:

We were told the RNLI are only called out to save lives, sea conditions are a mill pond, looks more like a taxi service to me.

3 RNLI boats to pick up people who don't need saving, total waste of money. You can see why some people may not want to donate their hard earned cash to them anymore.

47 minutes ago, sungod said:

Exactly - they are linked to the Industrial Migrant Complex (IMC)
Unfortunately many leaving 'Charity' end up filling the pockets of these bastards

So please,If youre planning to leave money to charities please make sure that these RNLI <deleted> get nothing from you

PS. MOST yoookay are run by well spoken bull <deleted> ers so be careful to vet them lest your money goes to complate <deleted>

Low value posts have been removed:

13. Low-Value Posts - Posts that add no written contribution are not allowed.

This includes emoji-only replies, very short comments, memes, GIFs, screenshots, or embedded social media posts without explanation or opinion.

 

30 minutes ago, Nick Carter icp said:

Why are they seeking asylum.......................from France ?

Because France is a dangerous country?

19 minutes ago, Will B Good said:

Why do you think I'm trying to project that as normal............it was simply a truthful anecdote told in passing......

Calm down and don't post if it's your time of the month. Leave it a week.

I doubt you posted the anecdote randomly. You had a very specific reason. To send a message. So what message did you mean to send by posting it? Go ahead and answer but it seems obvious to me. I could be wrong, however. So do tell.

3 minutes ago, Roadsternut said:

obviously, he's a master mariner.

12 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

I don't know about anyone else but to be a country that accepts asylum seekers but offers no route other than to land illegally seems to be, well, stupid. Or, it's purposely set up that way.

24 minutes ago, Will B Good said:

anecdote told in passing......

29 minutes ago, sungod said:

Nowhere, I made it up like you do with most of your posts.

Has anyone stopped to think that this guy Danny Thomas may be another government psyop
to paint people who likes border rules / enforcement as dangerous extremists?

We saw how the UK governments 'Nudge'/propaganda/PR/PsyOp Unit and their partners in the MSM were used to scare the <deleted> out of everyone over coldvid and WMDs - what's to say it isn't being used again here?

The real winners in a Yookay race-war scenario wouldn’t be any of the people actually throwing bricks.

It would be the same soft-handed, over-credentialed, permanently alarmed class that already runs the place.

Chaos is their favourite growth industry.

Here's the menu of lovely new powers they’d quietly serve themselves:

Emergency powers and curfews become permanent “temporary” measures.

First it’s “just until things calm down,” then it’s “for public safety,”

then it’s just the new normal.

Entire postcodes locked down at 9pm because some committee decided the vibes were off.

You want to walk your dog after dark?

Better have the right paperwork and the right skin tone for that particular street, mate - that is IF you're still allowed dogs in that postcode.

Surveillance on steroids.

Facial recognition cameras on every corner that used to only watch the high street now watch your living-room window.

Phone location data handed over “voluntarily” under the new Public Order Continuity Act.

Every WhatsApp group flagged if more than three people complain about the same thing.

Privacy becomes a luxury product for people who already live behind gates.

Enforced zones.

“No-go” and “protected” areas drawn on maps by people who have never set foot in them.

Certain neighbourhoods officially designated “high-tension community management zones.”

You need a digital pass to enter, exit, or buy milk.

The same civil servants who spent years denying two-tier policing suddenly get to formalise it with nice colour-coded maps and funding streams.

Expanded enforcement apparatus.

More police with fewer constraints, more private security firms on government contracts, more “community liaison officers” who answer to the Home Office rather than the public.

The Met gets shiny new toys and the legal cover to use them.

Arrests for “online incitement” spike while actual street violence is managed with press conferences.

Narrative control upgrades.

The Online Safety Act gets emergency amendments so any footage that contradicts the official story can be throttled in real time.

Independent journalists and livestreamers find their bank accounts frozen “pending investigation.”

The BBC and the rest of the legacy outlets become even more explicitly state-adjacent information management organs.

In short, the establishment doesn’t fear a race war the way ordinary people do.

They fear losing control.

A messy, visible breakdown lets them tighten every remaining screw under the banner of “restoring order.”

More cameras, more permits, more zones, more curfews, less privacy, and a population too exhausted and divided to notice that the people writing the rules never have to live under them.

That’s the real prize for the managerial class: not victory in any tribal sense, just a bigger, thicker, more permanent cage with them holding the keys.

Classic British decline strategy - crisis into career advancement and call it competence.

Edited September 23Sep 23 by Tourist2