Gurkha veterans seek equal rights

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by Osem

It is not factors beyond the Government's control which allow illegal immigrants to stay here whether indefinitely or not. It is a ridiculous set of rules/regulations which have come to be under a number of governments over the years and the failure (for various reasons) of the authorities to act effectively which has caused the difficulties we have NOT the impossibility of the task. Their negligence and ineptitude in these is matters is what's responsible for allowing such abuse of the system and it's entirely within their control if not their ability.

So you don't think it's unreasonable for the immigration office to know exactly where the illegal immigrant Joe Blogsein is at all times?
They should somehow know if he moves location then?
Crystal ball or sooth sayers?

Originally Posted by RizzyKing

So you were a friend of his while he was illegal ? if so why didn't you report him ?.

Because to do so would have been detrimental to everyone involved, me, him, Britain. Instead we're in a situation now where everyone involved benefits. I can still pop round and see him, he gets to live in the country and house where he grew up in, and gets an education, his uni gets thousands and thousands of pounds worth of funding, council get's it's tax, utilities companies get an income, Tesco's sell more goods, etc etc.
The only downer at the moment is that due to changes in the work side of the student visa it's nigh impossible for him to get a job, so that less money for the economy, but hey, it's what the tabloids wanted.

[Osem]

Originally Posted by Xaccers

So you don't think it's unreasonable for the immigration office to know exactly where the illegal immigrant Joe Blogsein is at all times?
They should somehow know if he moves location then?
Crystal ball or sooth sayers?

Actually I think it's entirely unreasonable to expect that. I do however feel that if Joe Blogsein, his extended family and their rabid dog should've had a much tougher time getting here in the first place and if that were indeed the case there'd be a whole lot less of his ilk for the authorites here to trace and remove. The end result of that would be there'd be far fewer illegals living here whether they arrived as illegals or came with visas and overstayed. The system would also then be able to act more quickly and compassionately in the case of genuine asylum seekers.

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by Osem

Actually I think it's entirely unreasonable to expect that. I do however feel that Joe Blogsein his extended family and their rabid dog should've had a much tougher time getting here in the first place and if that were indeed the case there'd be a whole lot less of his ilk for the authorites here to trace and remove. The end result - yes there'd be a whole lot less illegals living here.

The thing is, Joe Blogsein arrived in 2002 on a tourist visa totally legally.

[Osem]

Originally Posted by Xaccers

The thing is, Joe Blogsein arrived in 2002 on a tourist visa totally legally.

...and I made the point* that if illegals who'd entered otherwise found life a bit tougher it would be easier for the authorities to deal with the rest, including your chum. Who knows they may even be a bit more sensible about his situation too. As it is the system is so swamped by illegals of all descriptions that everyone gets tarred with the same brush, including those who need asylum and those like the Gurkhas who most people would happily allow to remain here.


* clearly after you copied my post.

[danielf]

Originally Posted by Xaccers

The thing is, Joe Blogsein arrived in 2002 on a tourist visa totally legally.

And he's a white Australian

[Osem]

Originally Posted by danielf

And he's a white Australian

Hmmm....... maybe Australia isn't the promised land they all like to claim it is

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by Osem

Hmmm....... maybe Australia isn't the promised land they all like to claim it is

Well you know what they say when an Australian migrates over here don't you?
The average IQ goes up in both countries

He's got another 39,999 fellow illegal immigrant Australians to keep him company though
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/797491.stm

I'm sure I read somewhere that Australians are the largest or one of the largest groups of illegal immigrants in London. Course if they were all deported, the pubs would be shut down.

[danielf]

Originally Posted by Osem

Hmmm....... maybe Australia isn't the promised land they all like to claim it is

Seriously. I may be wrong, but I recall reading a while ago that that the single largest group of people staying in the UK illegally is Australians that overstay their working holiday visa.

Edit: It's even worse. British backpackers are the largest group of illegal workers in Australia

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/4226949.stm

Excuse me but I think there are two threads going on here.Could we please please separate them?This IS the thread about the rights of Gurkhas serving before 1997 to become British Citizens NOT the wrongs or rights of immigration so why not take the other to another thread?Otherwise we are going to get right away from the original issue.

I think that they should have the choice and I've always been appalled that they weren't given the right automatically right from the start.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/2786991.stm

Gurkhas have been part of the British Army for almost 200 years

After suffering heavy casualties in the invasion of Nepal, the British East India Company signed a hasty peace deal in 1815, which also allowed it to recruit from the ranks of the former enemy. Following the partition of India in 1947, an agreement between Nepal, India and Britain meant four Gurkha regiments from the Indian army were transferred to the British Army, eventually becoming the Gurkha Brigade.
Since then, the Gurkhas have loyally fought for the British all over the world, receiving 13 Victoria Crosses between them.

[lostandconfused]

Originally Posted by Incognitas

Excuse me but I think there are two threads going on here.Could we please please separate them?This IS the thread about the rights of Gurkhas serving before 1997 to become British Citizens NOT the wrongs or rights of immigration so why not take the other to another thread?Otherwise we are going to get right away from the original issue.

I think that they should have the choice and I've always been appalled that they weren't given the right automatically right from the start.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/2786991.stm

[Osem]

The Gurkhas have my vote every time!

[Sirius]

Originally Posted by Osem

The Gurkhas have my vote every time!

And mine.

They have everyone's vote apart from that selfish bunch in westminster.

[Vlad_Dracul]

Originally Posted by Sirius

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7300521.stm

So we let them fight our battles.


We let them die in our battles.



Then when this and previous Governments have finished with them we make them apply to stay here and they then have to fight for that.


But we allow Illegal immigrants to stay and leach everything they can scam from us


So what spin will we hear from the Pretender and his joke of a Government today at Question time.

What they need to do is register as an overseas student,get a student visa,come here and just stay on...simple.

[MovedGoalPosts]

Please stick to the subject of this thread which is the Gurkas right of residence and not drift into igeneral mmigration policies thanks.