Flight to Rwanda

[lbab1702]

I’d love to get a flight to Rwanda. Beautiful country and people ( I’ve been there before) but I don’t understand why refugees to the U.K. should go there.

Really? So criminal mass shootings that occur because of a drug deal gone bad where both sides shoot each other up is terror related then? Or a mass shooting where a robber kills everyone in the business/home being robbed, is a terrorist not a robber?

You really need to look up the definition of terrorist.

I didn’t say most of them are terror related. Terrorise has an extremely narrow definition that does not fully represent the problem.

What is undeniably true is that most extremist-linked killing in recent years in the US is by right wing extremists. You can find the information on that easily.

On UK soil, sadly we have had bombings from all colours and creeds from the IRA to Copeland to Islamic extremists. All are vile but we do not seek to tar all Irish people or young white men with those crimes. Why do it for the others?

@TruthHertz and yet when the men smeared pork on the outside of a mosque they were arrested for racially aggravated hate crimes and men have been prosecuted for racially aggravated abh for attacking Muslims.

The whole 'Islam is not a race' is such a cop out

In the US far-rght terrorism now exceeds Islamist terrorism, both in numbers and in government focus. And before you say 'so what, that's the US', you don't get to invoke 9/11 and then say rightwing US terrorism doesn't matter.

In the UK it is more complex. The top threat is still Islamist terrorism BUT trends in the past two years (so very recent) show a big leap in right-wing terrorism across many indicators, and this is why CT people see it as very alarming. Last year for the first time right-wing referrals to Prevent outnumbered Islamists, and most of the children investigated for terrorist related activity were right-wing extremists. More than 40% of the most serious potential plots were right-wing. This is why looking at historical data is not the whole story. If current trends continue, then right-wing terrorism will be the dominant threat in the UK in the near future.

Yes, the US is a very different country from the U.K., which is why we have to examine them separately. We cannot base our views on terror threats in the U.K. on information about terrorism in the US.

”Between 1994 and 2020, there were 893 terrorist attacks and plots in the United States. Overall, right-wing terrorists perpetrated the majority—57 percent—of all attacks and plots during this period, compared to 25 percent committed by left-wing terrorists, 15 percent by religious terrorists, 3 percent by ethnonationalists, and 0.7 percent by terrorists with other motives.”
www.csis.org/analysis/escalating-terrorism-problem-united-states

What this doesn’t reflect are the # of victims though:

“In analyzing fatalities from terrorist attacks, religious terrorism has killed the largest number of individuals—3,086 people—primarily due to the attacks on September 11, 2001, which caused 2,977 deaths.10 The magnitude of this death toll fundamentally shaped U.S. counterterrorism policy over the past two decades. In comparison, right-wing terrorist attacks caused 335 deaths, left-wing attacks caused 22 deaths, and ethnonationalist terrorists caused 5 deaths.”

There is also this graph that shows right wing terrorism is more of a threat in the US than religious based terrorism (includes Islamist).

“In the UK it is more complex. The top threat is still Islamist terrorism BUT trends in the past two years (so very recent) show a big leap in right-wing terrorism across many indicators, and this is why CT people see it as very alarming. Last year for the first time right-wing referrals to Prevent outnumbered Islamists, and most of the children investigated for terrorist related activity were right-wing extremists. More than 40% of the most serious potential plots were right-wing. This is why looking at historical data is not the whole story. If current trends continue, then right-wing terrorism will be the dominant threat in the UK in the near future”

Would love to see a link to where you got this from. One reassuring piece of data is that our counter-terrorism efforts seem to be working pretty well as the number of fatalities is much much lower than it used to be.

Given the ECHR still allows a Russian Judge to sit, this development is extremely unnerving.

I think the ECHR suspended the Russian Judge Mikhail Lobov's activities in the organisation back in March ?

ECHR made its ruling, which claimants then took to a UK high court judge, who was the one who suspended their deportations.... until end of review, so deportations can then take place in a few weeks time, should the process be found legal.

ECHR under writes the GFA and is written into its very DNA.

Good luck unpicking that....

Either way it looks like the UK Government are considering replacing the ECHR with a bill of British Human Rights and have been considering doing so for the last twelve years at least, after the the ECHR repeatedly blocked removals of dangerous criminals intent on harming the UK like radical cleric Abu Qatada. In seems at least the last three to four British Prime Ministers have become exasperated with their interference

His deportation was blocked by the ECHR once (NOT repeatedly, check your facts) due to evidence that would be used in his trial had been obtained through torture.
15 months later, the legal process was gone through again, Jordan said it wouldn't use such evidence and he was deported.

Do you believe torture should be used to obtain evidence? You obviously believe posting untruths is perfectly ok.

All that information about the ECHR was known yesterday.

The ECHR ruled that the migrants should not be moved until the UK court had completed the Judicial Review - ie the UK courts should judge.

It didn't say the policy was unlawful.

You know who doesn't like the ECHR - anyone who doesn't like the right to privacy - media owners, the type that donate to the Conservatives and enjoy phone hacking.

@Alexandra2001 so it was a UK judge who actually stopped the deportations in this instance ?

Here we all are arguing about the ECHR, not discussing cost of living, housing, NHS, schools...

I never know if those who cheer on this government have been completely duped, or know that what they are doing is supporting a government seeking to make their own lives worse.

All this talk about immigrants - it is what your government is doing to you and your children that should be focused on. They want rid of the ECHR so they can take away YOUR rights and make YOUR life worse. The immigration application is a smokescreen. Don't fall for it.

I wonder how long it will be before the Mail runs another Enemies of the People front page about UK judges again ?

@Suzi888

Only those in genuine need get benefits, and only after their asylum claims have been processed.

Your life is not bad because of refugees or immigrants, your life is bad because of policy decisions made by successive governments who have reduced public spending year on year. As a percentage of GDP public spending is at one of its lowest levels for decades. That is a political choice, nothing more.

Blame the government, not the people fleeing for their lives, or even those chancing their lives on the prospect of a better one.

Asylum seekers get £40 a week. Yup it’s obviously the money they are after 🙄

As i understand it from a news report yesterday, in an interview with a govt justice minister, yes, who said "these things happen..."

ECHR blocked one deportation and 6 others then went to an emergency UK judge and he blocked the remaining ones.

the Times refers to one ECHR case blocked and then just says, 6 others then had their cases heard... no mention of a UK high court judge.

That's only before their application is approved. It's £40 per week plus accomodation.

I saw this on Twitter and it made me think of some of the posters on this thread and how they are being duped by the divisive tactics of this disgusting government.

twitter.com/JaneyGodley/status/1537295381687566336?s=20&t=463RTRjGMoaR6tQoistgiw

(Obviously we are not the US and so the finer details are different here, but the general principle applies: make your supporters feel superior, even if they are struggling in a myriad of ways).

Is this the same Janey Godley who has been duped into thinking it’s perfectly reasonable for males to be put in women’s prison and blocks anyone who doesn’t agree?

There are too many people in the World, never mind this bloody country, you can’t see a GP or dentist, wait years for treatment, our food is reared in disgusting conditions to keep up with consumption. There are too many humans

What, nobody can see a GP or a dentist. Hyperbole. Yes there are many issues, partly caused by dentists not wanting to work NHS contracts along with the fact that they and GPs are leaving the profession in droves. That is not the fault of refugees.

Agree with conditions for farm animals, but that is the fault of the consumer demanding a never ending supply of cheap meat. Nothing to do with refugees.

Germany hosts some 2m refugees, the UK hosts about 173k. Yet public services in Germany are not in crisis and housing is less dysfunctional than in Britain. Refugees, the ECHR, human rights lawyers etc are not the problem.

twitter.com/JeremyCliffe/status/1537116342561738753?t=nvEKdG32N5mgRKWJHjQdXA&s=19

Is that meant to be some sort of "gotcha"? What has that got to do with the issues here? Anyway the video is not of Janey Godley, she just retweeted it.