21-04-2018, 02:29 PM
101
Re: The Windrush Debacle
Originally Posted by Flowerpower;1400035[B
]No she didnt lie![/B]Heres the question Corbyn asked
“Did the PM, The then Home Secretary, sign off that decision.”
Mrs May jumped to her feet and said
“NO! The decision to destroy the landing cards was taken in 2009 under a Labour government.”
No lies there as the former Labour Home Secretary, Alan Johnson confirmed.
Yes she did - its a natural trait of all scumbag 'nasty party' members!!!
here's the proof:
https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/ent...b0edca2cbe405c
An extract from this article:
The second aspect is the change to legislation. The government has attempted to muddy the waters, ridiculously claiming that this was a change of law under Labour. This claim is false. It could not explain why cases are arising now, as Labour has unfortunately been out of office for 8 years.
The key legal change was made in the Immigration Act 2014. This was when Theresa May was Home Secretary. Previously, all longstanding Commonwealth residents were protected from enforced removal by a specific exemption in the 1999 Immigration and Asylum Act. It was this clause that was removed in the revised 2014 legislation.
The removal of this protection was enacted without any proper parliamentary vote or even scrutiny. If it was a deliberate government policy, it was surreptitious and nasty.
21-04-2018, 02:46 PM
102
Re: The Windrush Debacle
Originally Posted by Uncle Joe
->
Yes she did - its a natural trait of all scumbag 'nasty party' members!!!here's the proof:
https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/ent...b0edca2cbe405c
An extract from this article:
The second aspect is the change to legislation. The government has attempted to muddy the waters, ridiculously claiming that this was a change of law under Labour. This claim is false. It could not explain why cases are arising now, as Labour has unfortunately been out of office for 8 years.
The key legal change was made in the Immigration Act 2014. This was when Theresa May was Home Secretary. Previously, all longstanding Commonwealth residents were protected from enforced removal by a specific exemption in the 1999 Immigration and Asylum Act. It was this clause that was removed in the revised 2014 legislation.
The removal of this protection was enacted without any proper parliamentary vote or even scrutiny. If it was a deliberate government policy, it was surreptitious and nasty.
Here you are, another example of labour duplicity.
https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/94...C-Labour-Party
21-04-2018, 02:51 PM
103
Re: The Windrush Debacle
Originally Posted by Rainmaker
->
Its funny that , despite evidence to the contrary you continue to believe the account of that left wing rag instead of looking for a confirmation from another source. But then what can we expect from the Left wing stirrers. In the same vein you believe the Russian propaganda about the chemical attacks and the complete denials that Ant-Semitism is a serious matter within the Labour Party. Here you are, another example of labour duplicity.
https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/94...C-Labour-Party
Yes, yes, yes, and our own chemical weapons 'experts' have said there is no proof of the origin of the chemical used, so yet again - you're spouting bullshit!!!
21-04-2018, 04:38 PM
104
Re: The Windrush Debacle
Originally Posted by Uncle Joe
->
Yes, yes, yes, and our own chemical weapons 'experts' have said there is no proof of the origin of the chemical used, so yet again - you're spouting bullshit!!!
22-04-2018, 07:38 AM
105
Re: The Windrush Debacle
Yet more evidence that Theresa May and Home Office knew of the problem of the 'Windrush Generation' in 2014, when a report written by Child Poverty Action Group was published on the matter.https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-a8315676.html
22-04-2018, 07:56 AM
106
Re: The Windrush Debacle
Very apt:https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...f-wind-cartoon
22-04-2018, 09:43 AM
107
Re: The Windrush Debacle
You may give as many Left Wing links as you like, the argument was never about whether the government knew about the implications. They did and that's never been denied.What you constantly keep trying to brush off is that the decision to destroy the documentation was made while Labour was in power. The other point that has been glossed over in this is the opportunist attitude of the Labour leader in stirring up a fuss to distract media attention from the Ant-Semitic behaviour of his own party.
I noticed you didn't comment on Corbyn's behaviour during PMs questions and on his deliberate omission of the word illegal (which I repeat below) l in an attempt to portray the incident in its worst light
Mr Corbyn had omitted a crucial word. In fact, Mrs May had vowed (in 2012) to create ‘a really hostile environment for illegal immigrants”. Mr Corbyn repeated this misquote a few moments later, and then added another, by claiming that Mrs May had sent vans to Brent in London “telling migrants to ‘go home’”. Once again, he’d left out the word “illegal”.
22-04-2018, 09:51 AM
108
Re: The Windrush Debacle
Originally Posted by rainmaker
->
its funny that , despite evidence to the contrary you continue to believe the account of that left wing rag instead of looking for a confirmation from another source. But then what can we expect from the left wing stirrers. In the same vein you believe the russian propaganda about the chemical attacks and the complete denials that ant-semitism is a serious matter within the labour party. Here you are, another example of labour duplicity.
https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/94...c-labour-party
22-04-2018, 11:16 AM
109
Re: The Windrush Debacle
Originally Posted by Uncle Joe
->
Yes she did - its a natural trait of all scumbag 'nasty party' members!!!here's the proof:
https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/ent...b0edca2cbe405c
An extract from this article:
The second aspect is the change to legislation. The government has attempted to muddy the waters, ridiculously claiming that this was a change of law under Labour. This claim is false. It could not explain why cases are arising now, as Labour has unfortunately been out of office for 8 years.
The key legal change was made in the Immigration Act 2014. This was when Theresa May was Home Secretary. Previously, all longstanding Commonwealth residents were protected from enforced removal by a specific exemption in the 1999 Immigration and Asylum Act. It was this clause that was removed in the revised 2014 legislation.
The removal of this protection was enacted without any proper parliamentary vote or even scrutiny. If it was a deliberate government policy, it was surreptitious and nasty.
OMG i nearly peed myself! 😂😂😂. You are seriously expecting me to look at “proof” written by Diane Abbott! 😂😂. I suppose she wrote that on the 32nd of Aprilember.
22-04-2018, 11:19 AM
110
Re: The Windrush Debacle
Originally Posted by Rainmaker
->
You may give as many Left Wing links as you like, the argument was never about whether the government knew about the implications. They did and that's never been denied. What you constantly keep trying to brush off is that the decision to destroy the documentation was made while Labour was in power. The other point that has been glossed over in this is the opportunist attitude of the Labour leader in stirring up a fuss to distract media attention from the Ant-Semitic behaviour of his own party.
I noticed you didn't comment on Corbyn's behaviour during PMs questions and on his deliberate omission of the word illegal (which I repeat below) l in an attempt to portray the incident in its worst light
Mr Corbyn had omitted a crucial word. In fact, Mrs May had vowed (in 2012) to create ‘a really hostile environment for illegal immigrants”. Mr Corbyn repeated this misquote a few moments later, and then added another, by claiming that Mrs May had sent vans to Brent in London “telling migrants to ‘go home’”. Once again, he’d left out the word “illegal”.
actually it was Alan Johnson (then Labour Home Secretary) who first used the phrase “hostile environment”. this was pointed out on tv this morning when Emily Thornberry was being interviewed and she confirmed this was correct.
| Thread Tools | |
|
|
