S.S.R. Posted December 11, 2007 Share Posted December 11, 2007 Absolutely ridiculous. What must he do to remain in the country, hijack a plane? He's just had a baby, pays extraordinarily high taxes and is positively contributing to society. Not to mention potentially being a great player. FFS. How does he do that without a National Insurance number? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
captainhaircut Posted December 11, 2007 Share Posted December 11, 2007 I see he's got a girlfriend who's just had his kid. Can he not just marry her like? Romantic as fuck like but you gotta do what you gotta do. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nobody Posted December 11, 2007 Share Posted December 11, 2007 Why is he getting deported? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wullie Posted December 11, 2007 Share Posted December 11, 2007 I see he's got a girlfriend who's just had his kid. Can he not just marry her like? Romantic as fuck like but you gotta do what you gotta do. I wondered that too. Have they changed the rules? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tooj Posted December 12, 2007 Share Posted December 12, 2007 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7070798.stm Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
indi Posted December 12, 2007 Share Posted December 12, 2007 What pisses me off about this is that in a way RodrigoPalacio is right, if this guy was a plumber or whatever then no-one would give a shit. Some of the comments I've heard from Aidy Boothroyd seem to suggest that he thinks Al Bangura is being personally victimised by the immigration authorities, he isn't, they do this shit all the time. Hundreds, probably thousands, of people are being deported back to countries that they have fled from in real danger for their life, every year, it's fucking ridiculous. They were trying to deport people to Zimbabwe recently at the exact same time that members of our government were constantly on TV saying just how dangerous a place it was, for fucks sake. The only reason that this is in the papers and on the TV is because this lad has some friends with access to the media who can kick up a stink about it. I wonder how many people who were living in the Watford area have been deported in the last year? Do you reckon Aidy Boothroyd gives the slightest fuck about them? I also wonder how many of these people end up dead, I bet they don't keep any records of that. If you're supporting Al Bangura being allowed to stay then you should really be supporting a whole load of other people's right to stay, you can't just go "Oh well he's a footy player so that makes him different" because that's bollocks, if it's dangerous to send people back, it's dangerous to send people back, what they do for a living and how much tax they pay have fuck all to do with it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted December 12, 2007 Share Posted December 12, 2007 Absolutely ridiculous. What must he do to remain in the country, hijack a plane? He's just had a baby, pays extraordinarily high taxes and is positively contributing to society. Not to mention potentially being a great player. FFS. How does he do that without a National Insurance number? Emergency tax code? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keefaz Posted December 12, 2007 Share Posted December 12, 2007 AFAIK, he didn't ask to be here, but this is where he ended up for better or worse. I don't see what's wrong about wanting to reward this kid who has tried his best to make something of his life in difficult circumstances. Is the problem really with Al Bangura or is it with his parents? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Edd Posted December 12, 2007 Share Posted December 12, 2007 What pisses me off about this is that in a way RodrigoPalacio is right, if this guy was a plumber or whatever then no-one would give a s***. Some of the comments I've heard from Aidy Boothroyd seem to suggest that he thinks Al Bangura is being personally victimised by the immigration authorities, he isn't, they do this s*** all the time. Hundreds, probably thousands, of people are being deported back to countries that they have fled from in real danger for their life, every year, it's f****** ridiculous. They were trying to deport people to Zimbabwe recently at the exact same time that members of our government were constantly on TV saying just how dangerous a place it was, for fucks sake. The only reason that this is in the papers and on the TV is because this lad has some friends with access to the media who can kick up a stink about it. I wonder how many people who were living in the Watford area have been deported in the last year? Do you reckon Aidy Boothroyd gives the slightest f*** about them? I also wonder how many of these people end up dead, I bet they don't keep any records of that. If you're supporting Al Bangura being allowed to stay then you should really be supporting a whole load of other people's right to stay, you can't just go "Oh well he's a footy player so that makes him different" because that's bollocks, if it's dangerous to send people back, it's dangerous to send people back, what they do for a living and how much tax they pay have f*** all to do with it. Well said Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wullie Posted December 12, 2007 Share Posted December 12, 2007 If you're supporting Al Bangura being allowed to stay then you should really be supporting a whole load of other people's right to stay, you can't just go "Oh well he's a footy player so that makes him different" because that's bollocks, if it's dangerous to send people back, it's dangerous to send people back, what they do for a living and how much tax they pay have fuck all to do with it. Would you just let anyone in then to take advantage of our benefits system? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest elbee909 Posted December 12, 2007 Share Posted December 12, 2007 If you're supporting Al Bangura being allowed to stay then you should really be supporting a whole load of other people's right to stay, you can't just go "Oh well he's a footy player so that makes him different" because that's bollocks, if it's dangerous to send people back, it's dangerous to send people back, what they do for a living and how much tax they pay have fuck all to do with it. Would you just let anyone in then to take advantage of our benefits system? What the fuck? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wullie Posted December 12, 2007 Share Posted December 12, 2007 If you're supporting Al Bangura being allowed to stay then you should really be supporting a whole load of other people's right to stay, you can't just go "Oh well he's a footy player so that makes him different" because that's bollocks, if it's dangerous to send people back, it's dangerous to send people back, what they do for a living and how much tax they pay have fuck all to do with it. Would you just let anyone in then to take advantage of our benefits system? What the fuck? I'm not doing a Morrissey or even a Morph, I'm just interested in indi's position. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
indi Posted December 12, 2007 Share Posted December 12, 2007 If you're supporting Al Bangura being allowed to stay then you should really be supporting a whole load of other people's right to stay, you can't just go "Oh well he's a footy player so that makes him different" because that's bollocks, if it's dangerous to send people back, it's dangerous to send people back, what they do for a living and how much tax they pay have fuck all to do with it. Would you just let anyone in then to take advantage of our benefits system? So what would you do with people who've come here to escape persecution? The argument in this case is that it's dangerous for him to go back, surely if that's the consideration it applies to anyone regardless of their employment status. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
indi Posted December 12, 2007 Share Posted December 12, 2007 No-one comes here following the dream of getting £59.15 a week JSA, by the way. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wullie Posted December 12, 2007 Share Posted December 12, 2007 If you're supporting Al Bangura being allowed to stay then you should really be supporting a whole load of other people's right to stay, you can't just go "Oh well he's a footy player so that makes him different" because that's bollocks, if it's dangerous to send people back, it's dangerous to send people back, what they do for a living and how much tax they pay have fuck all to do with it. Would you just let anyone in then to take advantage of our benefits system? So what would you do with people who've come here to escape persecution? The argument in this case is that it's dangerous for him to go back, surely if that's the consideration it applies to anyone regardless of their employment status. So would you extend that policy to the bloke who raped that woman, posted above? And how do you prove persecution? My position is that I'm not arsed what Bangura potentially faces in Sierra Leone - he's contributing positively and so he stays. Anything else is bureaucratic toss. BTW, for some people, £59.15 JSA is life's ambition. That includes some people who are asylum seekers and even more people who are English charva scum. Deluded to pretend otherwise. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
indi Posted December 12, 2007 Share Posted December 12, 2007 If you're supporting Al Bangura being allowed to stay then you should really be supporting a whole load of other people's right to stay, you can't just go "Oh well he's a footy player so that makes him different" because that's bollocks, if it's dangerous to send people back, it's dangerous to send people back, what they do for a living and how much tax they pay have fuck all to do with it. Would you just let anyone in then to take advantage of our benefits system? So what would you do with people who've come here to escape persecution? The argument in this case is that it's dangerous for him to go back, surely if that's the consideration it applies to anyone regardless of their employment status. So would you extend that policy to the bloke who raped that woman, posted above? And how do you prove persecution? My position is that I'm not arsed what Bangura potentially faces in Sierra Leone - he's contributing positively and so he stays. Anything else is bureaucratic toss. BTW, for some people, £59.15 JSA is life's ambition. That includes some people who are asylum seekers and even more people who are English charva scum. Deluded to pretend otherwise. No I probably wouldn't extend it to that bloke that raped the woman above, but that's hardly a typical example to use, is it! How do you prove persecution? Well I guess you investigate it, like anything else. Plenty of people could and would contribute positively to our society, including the majority of those who get deported - you know that asylum seekers aren't allowed to work by law until they've received some kind of "right to remain", don't you? - but this country like every other country has placed pretty strict limits on who can come and live here for economic reasons, Al Bangura obviously doesn't meet those criteria. Anyway, that's not what this is about, he's claiming asylum on the grounds that he would face persecution or a threat to his life if he returned to Sierra Leone, if that's the case then I say again: what the fuck has what he does for a living got to do with anything!?! English charva scum I'll give you, but you seriously think that people travel halfway across the globe and smuggle themselves into the country in a storage container or by hanging off the bottom of the Eurostar for the chance of claiming the dole!?! If so, what are you basing this view upon? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wullie Posted December 12, 2007 Share Posted December 12, 2007 No I probably wouldn't extend it to that bloke that raped the woman above, but that's hardly a typical example to use, is it! How do you prove persecution? Well I guess you investigate it, like anything else. Plenty of people could and would contribute positively to our society, including the majority of those who get deported - you know that asylum seekers aren't allowed to work by law until they've received some kind of "right to remain", don't you? - but this country like every other country has placed pretty strict limits on who can come and live here for economic reasons, Al Bangura obviously doesn't meet those criteria. Anyway, that's not what this is about, he's claiming asylum on the grounds that he would face persecution or a threat to his life if he returned to Sierra Leone, if that's the case then I say again: what the fuck has what he does for a living got to do with anything!?! English charva scum I'll give you, but you seriously think that people travel halfway across the globe and smuggle themselves into the country in a storage container or by hanging off the bottom of the Eurostar for the chance of claiming the dole!?! If so, what are you basing this view upon? Investigate? Do you think the UK should foot the bill for some sort of asylum detective system? Send some civil servants into Sierra Leone and ask around X's friends and family to find out whether he's really in danger or not? The dole, no, the benefits, yes some of them do. "They" don't stay in France because France don't give them money and accomodation while they have their application processed. We do. Of course they'd hang on to the Eurostar for £50 a week if they've been living in real poverty all their lives! Indi, don't take this the wrong way but you seem to overcompensate all too often for what you see as an overabundance of right wing thinking by tripping over your own feet to get as far-left as you can. You say English charva scum exist, but you don't agree that a similar minority from other countries might make their way to Britain? Why not? This brings me back to the original point I was making, albeit not very well. Just because I don't think Bangura should be deported doesn't make me, or anyone else, a hypocrite. I'm not advocating plumbers, electricians or any other immigrants be deported and then in the same breath saying "well if he's a footballer then let him stay", but you assume everyone is actually saying that, or at least thinking it to the point where it "pisses you off". I'm no hemp-smoking, long-haired, sandal-wearing, veggie-eating, car-bashing hippie and I think we need to have some sort of workable immigration policy that goes further than "If they say they're in danger, then let them stay and give them some cash to get them by" but that doesn't make me some sort of Neo-Nazi either. We're talking about Bangura because it's a) on the news and b) involving a footballer on a football message board. Witness this thread: http://www.newcastle-online.com/nufcforum/index.php?topic=6410.0 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tooj Posted December 12, 2007 Share Posted December 12, 2007 No I probably wouldn't extend it to that bloke that raped the woman above, but that's hardly a typical example to use, is it! How do you prove persecution? Well I guess you investigate it, like anything else. Plenty of people could and would contribute positively to our society, including the majority of those who get deported - you know that asylum seekers aren't allowed to work by law until they've received some kind of "right to remain", don't you? - but this country like every other country has placed pretty strict limits on who can come and live here for economic reasons, Al Bangura obviously doesn't meet those criteria. Anyway, that's not what this is about, he's claiming asylum on the grounds that he would face persecution or a threat to his life if he returned to Sierra Leone, if that's the case then I say again: what the fuck has what he does for a living got to do with anything!?! English charva scum I'll give you, but you seriously think that people travel halfway across the globe and smuggle themselves into the country in a storage container or by hanging off the bottom of the Eurostar for the chance of claiming the dole!?! If so, what are you basing this view upon? Investigate? Do you think the UK should foot the bill for some sort of asylum detective system? Send some civil servants into Sierra Leone and ask around X's friends and family to find out whether he's really in danger or not? The dole, no, the benefits, yes some of them do. "They" don't stay in France because France don't give them money and accomodation while they have their application processed. We do. Of course they'd hang on to the Eurostar for £50 a week if they've been living in real poverty all their lives! Indi, don't take this the wrong way but you seem to overcompensate all too often for what you see as an overabundance of right wing thinking by tripping over your own feet to get as far-left as you can. You say English charva scum exist, but you don't agree that a similar minority from other countries might make their way to Britain? Why not? This brings me back to the original point I was making, albeit not very well. Just because I don't think Bangura should be deported doesn't make me, or anyone else, a hypocrite. I'm not advocating plumbers, electricians or any other immigrants be deported and then in the same breath saying "well if he's a footballer then let him stay", but you assume everyone is actually saying that, or at least thinking it to the point where it "pisses you off". I'm no hemp-smoking, long-haired, sandal-wearing, veggie-eating, car-bashing hippie and I think we need to have some sort of workable immigration policy that goes further than "If they say they're in danger, then let them stay and give them some cash to get them by" but that doesn't make me some sort of Neo-Nazi either. We're talking about Bangura because it's a) on the news and b) involving a footballer on a football message board. Witness this thread: http://www.newcastle-online.com/nufcforum/index.php?topic=6410.0 I can vouch for that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JamesD Posted December 12, 2007 Share Posted December 12, 2007 who the fuck smokes hemp? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tooj Posted December 12, 2007 Share Posted December 12, 2007 who the fuck smokes hemp? Wullie's proven how much of an L7 he is though and not being any of the above by actually using the word hemp. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wullie Posted December 12, 2007 Share Posted December 12, 2007 http://www.duffzone.org/framegrabs/4f17/01162004120153.jpg "Shine on, you crazy diamond!" Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tooj Posted December 12, 2007 Share Posted December 12, 2007 http://www.duffzone.org/framegrabs/4f17/01162004120153.jpg "Shine on, you crazy diamond!" How dare you take the name of Pink Floyd in vain when you're currently listening to Britney Spears. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wullie Posted December 12, 2007 Share Posted December 12, 2007 I'm not! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tooj Posted December 12, 2007 Share Posted December 12, 2007 http://img140.imageshack.us/img140/6665/161hurricaneneddybr5.jpg We can't do it, man! That's discipline! That's like tellin' Gene Krupa not to go "boom boom bam bam bam, boom boom bam bam bam, boom boom boom bam ba ba ba ba, da boo boo tss!" We don't believe in rules, like, we gave them up when we started livin' like freaky beatniks! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
indi Posted December 12, 2007 Share Posted December 12, 2007 Investigate? Do you think the UK should foot the bill for some sort of asylum detective system? Send some civil servants into Sierra Leone and ask around X's friends and family to find out whether he's really in danger or not? Seeing as those are, and have always been, by far and away the most common reasons for someone being granted asylum, then I think it's probably as safe bet that the UK already has an "asylum detective system" as you've dubbed it, how else do you propose they make a decision on this kind of thing, toss a coin? The dole, no, the benefits, yes some of them do. "They" don't stay in France because France don't give them money and accomodation while they have their application processed. We do. Of course they'd hang on to the Eurostar for £50 a week if they've been living in real poverty all their lives! They do get accommodation in France, remember the Sangatte refugee camp? http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/actionnetwork/A2314801#8 http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/actionnetwork/A2151785#2 I suggest you look at that site to see what a shitty deal they actually do get in the UK, notice the section that says: Asylum seekers are not allowed to work or take vocational training while waiting for a decision about their application. They can take unpaid or voluntary work. If they're not allowed to work what choice do they have but to go onto benefits? Indi, don't take this the wrong way but you seem to overcompensate all too often for what you see as an overabundance of right wing thinking by tripping over your own feet to get as far-left as you can. You say English charva scum exist, but you don't agree that a similar minority from other countries might make their way to Britain? Why not? What's one of the most prominent characteristics of "English charva scum"? Are they renowned for their motivation, their get up and go, their burning desire to improve their lives? Of course not, they're lazy bastards, aren't they!?! Now answer me this; would a lazy bastard leave their home and everything they'd ever had and known, to travel half way across the globe having to smuggle themselves onto boats or in the back of lorries, etc, to try and get to another country, just so they could claim benefits? I don't think so, it makes no sense whatsoever. They come here to work, they want to improve their lives, it's fucking obvious!! This brings me back to the original point I was making, albeit not very well. Just because I don't think Bangura should be deported doesn't make me, or anyone else, a hypocrite. I'm not advocating plumbers, electricians or any other immigrants be deported and then in the same breath saying "well if he's a footballer then let him stay", but you assume everyone is actually saying that, or at least thinking it to the point where it "pisses you off". I'm no hemp-smoking, long-haired, sandal-wearing, veggie-eating, car-bashing hippie and I think we need to have some sort of workable immigration policy that goes further than "If they say they're in danger, then let them stay and give them some cash to get them by" but that doesn't make me some sort of Neo-Nazi either. We're talking about Bangura because it's a) on the news and b) involving a footballer on a football message board. Witness this thread: http://www.newcastle-online.com/nufcforum/index.php?topic=6410.0 So if you're not advocating plumbers, electricians or any other immigrants being deported, whilst saying Al Bangura should be allowed to stay and you're aware that the immigration authorities make ridiculous decisions like this all the time - as evidenced by that thread - which were the things I was criticising, then I really don't see what problem you've got with what I said. There are clearly people around who will be supporting this bloke, but would never support anyone else in the same situation and they're doing that simply because they've been influenced by the positive media coverage he's had due to him being a footballer. If you don't think that there's people doing that then you need to open your eyes to the world around you. I don't assume that everyone's saying that, at all, but some people will be and those were the people I was criticising, if you're not one of them - which you clearly aren't - then why are you getting your knickers in such a twist over it!?! I wasn't implying that anyone in this thread was behaving like that, in fact the only person I mentioned specifically was Aidy Boothroyd and that was because of direct comments I've seen from him that suggested that he was behaving exactly like that. My post was made as a response to everyone getting on their moral high-horses about what RodrigoPalacio said, when some of it, specifically the bit about if it wasn't in the papers nobody would give a shit, was exactly correct. Given that, it's somewhat ironic that you're now criticising me with an almost identical argument to what he said in his first post and everyone jumped all over him for. Finally, if you think that the current immigration policy of this country consists of: "If they say they're in danger, then let them stay and give them some cash to get them by" then you're right that doesn't make you "some sort of Neo-Nazi" it just shows that you're almost totally ignorant of the reality of the situation. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now