What could he possibly gain by lying to a journalist?
Politics at Westminster | BREAKING: UKIP
- Thread starter Team Brian GB
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
If you are arrested for 'immigration matters,' it would seem highly likely that there's something at least a little bit suspect with your visa. Do you think the arrests were wrongful?
Maybe I'm just naive for assuming the police aren't all racists.
The police will probably just be 'following orders'
I think random stop and searches without justifiable reason are wrongful.
Definitely an answer there.
Do you really think the Indy are going to run a story that size with libellous info, featuring quotes from an MP, if the story isn't true. Do you know how journalism works in Westminster? For one second, do you not think the editor rang the home office before running? Wise up.
Look at the home office twitter feed today(pictures included).
https://mobile.twitter.com/ukhomeoffice
Shameful and disgusting.
Look at the home office twitter feed today(pictures included).
https://mobile.twitter.com/ukhomeoffice
Shameful and disgusting.
Well if you get three arrests, it strikes me as if there was clearly some reasoning behind it, and not random at all. What's really disgusting about this is how this 'witness'(who clearly just wants his name in the paper) is implying some kind of racial motive which is baseless. If you're looking for illegal immigrants, funnily enough, the majority aren't white people with children called Hector(the Kensal Green crowd).
Can you seriously not see what can be gained by lying to a journalist? They practically encourage it.
It's not libellous in the slightest. They've very cleverly skirted around all libel laws out there. There are some rather unpleasant insinuations, however.
Sky News reporting 140 illegal immigrants arrested in raids.
That's pretty good for a police service that are just randomly stopping people in the street hoping they sound foreign.
That's pretty good for a police service that are just randomly stopping people in the street hoping they sound foreign.
People get arrested wrongfully all the time. But on random stop and searches, how can you possibly defend that?
If you are a policeman and you randomly stop 100 people in the street, I guarantee you that you won't have an illegal immigrant rate of 3/100. I suspect that the 'random' element of this has been slightly overplayed by the left wing hysteria brigade.
It is a random stop and search though. There is no way in which you could possibly decide "s/he looks like an illegal immigrant". This is perhaps why they're being accused of racial profiling, because it's just easier to only stop the 'darkies', as the BNP might say.
Yeah, exactly. It is not libellous because they had no need to embellish the story.
It is the fecking truth.
So if it is the truth, does it make you feel uncomfortable - coloured British people being stopped on way to work like second class citizens?
Question 2 - tomorrow when the Home Office issues its official statement, if it has no outright denial of the Indy story taking place will you apologise? That article makes some strong accusations against one of our finest government offices. I'm happy to do the same.
He'll have to wait for the daily mail to tell him how to feel about it.
I don't think you're allowed to say coloured anymore.
The Home Office have better things do to than deny rather spurious stories emanating out of the left-wing press. It's quite clear the story has been carefully put together, using a very 'friendly' witness to the Independent's cause.
If you're a left-wing person, you'll go out of your way to find some way to get at the Tories. There's plenty of genuine ammunition which is why I find it confusing that you're going after them for trying to crack down on illegal immigrants.
I'm the one who's open-minded about this and not jumping to conclusions.
I know the left tend to have inferior brain capacity but it's abundantly clear to me that you really should give the police/home office the benefit of the doubt before assuming they're stopping people randomly in the street.
The chances are that they're not. Not that you'll accept it. You're hysterical.
They werent checking their visas since people domt carry passports around with them routinely
No, i find the whole thing utterly, utterly fecking disgusting gutter politics, unbecoming of our nation and the progress we made from the 60s when the Tories used an election poster saying :If you want a nigger for a neighbour, vote Labour. Peter Griffiths was the candidate incase you ask.
And, if for one moment, you think this is just some left wing claptrap, i await your shock tomorrow when the home office actually issue a statement confirming it. Because they will.
Until then, night
Ironic then really, that you're remaining open minded to a policy which not only will have very little efficiency but will also harass vast swathes of the British Public. It's the way they're trying to crack down on illegal immigrants which grates with us, you tit. There is no way to justify the stopping and searching of masses of people just because there's an off chance they might catch a few illegal immigrants. What are they going to do, just carry on until they find them all? It's a ridiculous policy which deserves nothing but utter contempt.
Suspected
Eugh. How do you decide which ones are illegally here, then? I'm yet to hear an answer from you on that.
They will confirm going after illegal immigrants. If they confirm they randomly stop people in the street because they're black I'll be quite surprised.
I suspect it is random, stop a brown person, ask a few questions and if they dont answer quick enough arrest them
Do illegal immigrants have something which sets them apart from everyone else?
This might not be obvious to a film studies graduate.
The police are arresting people on suspicion of being illegal immigrants. Given that it would seem unlikely that just stopping people in the street would be a practical way of achieving this, it would appear more likely that they had some prior information about the people they were stopping. Maybe they were stopping people down a road where it was known that illegal immigrants were being housed? Maybe a business had been employing them illegally, so the police stopped by there?
I'm just not assuming foul play from the police. You are.
The police are arresting people on suspicion of being illegal immigrants. Given that it would seem unlikely that just stopping people in the street would be a practical way of achieving this, it would appear more likely that they had some prior information about the people they were stopping. Maybe they were stopping people down a road where it was known that illegal immigrants were being housed? Maybe a business had been employing them illegally, so the police stopped by there?
I'm just not assuming foul play from the police. You are.
Well then there's no hope for you in this world. This would never happen under a caring, compassionate Labour government.
I suspect this is just a case of the Tories pandering to the racists who are going to vote for UKIP in 2015.
Is the correct answer
10 million racists in the UK.
This Tory government have decided arbiteraly to bring immigration down to the 10 of thousands and will use any trick to achive it, so yes I don't think this would happen on this scale under a Labour government
As a film student, I can tell when people are just offering hypothetical scenarios. Perhaps they were doing as you say, but all we've got to go on is the indie article. And that article has several witnesses quite explicitly claiming to have seen the police stop and search people with non-white skin. Perhaps they did cherry pick witnesses to get this angle of the story, but come on Al, they were in a train station stopping people and asking them questions. That's not a very effective way of carrying out an operation which you described.
There's literally nothing to debate here. You're educationally sub-normal. Just look at your posts. You're making the most ridiculous assumptions based on one spurious newspaper article.
You want to believe the police are racist, the voters of the most popular political party at the last election are racist, the Home Office are racist, and God knows what else.
The CE Forum can turn into a cult at times, where left wing conspiracy theorists gather to display their new evidence of a hate campaign that doesn't exist in the outside world. The majority of the British public would laugh in your faces. The rest are currently at David Icke's annual conference.
You want to believe the police are racist, the voters of the most popular political party at the last election are racist, the Home Office are racist, and God knows what else.
The CE Forum can turn into a cult at times, where left wing conspiracy theorists gather to display their new evidence of a hate campaign that doesn't exist in the outside world. The majority of the British public would laugh in your faces. The rest are currently at David Icke's annual conference.
I never said the police was racist, just that this policy is pandering to racists.
And I'm not sure you can call someone dumber than you less than half an hour after claiming an article misses a piece of information which it contained.
And I'm not sure you can call someone dumber than you less than half an hour after claiming an article misses a piece of information which it contained.
That would be closer to Labour policy and that of Brussels more likely.
Andrew Mitchell says hello.
Two separate but related points to this story:
Firstly the punishment for employers doesn't appear to carry much of a deterrent and their culpability should not be overl9ooked, which it is all too often.
Secondly, being found committing an illegal act should not necessarily be seen as the worse part or end of the story, as exploitation could be a key contributing factor to someone's circumstances [in that case the asylum system or NGOs have their role].
Perhaps they were doing as I say. Yes. Maybe. Maybe they weren't. But all we have to go on is a snippet of left-wing press, so we'd better believe it as it's the only evidence we've got.
You're not the sharpest.
If the policy was as the independent is claiming, would you still support it?
What? Rounding people up in the street? Of course I wouldn't. It shouldn't need saying. It just so clearly isn't the policy.