Government intend new travel regulations

e-borders is mainly to help tackle immigration offences, drug smugglers/people trafficers and wanted criminals trying to flee the country.

I think the last paragraph of the artical sums this up quite nicely.
 
No, it is about controlling us. Don't fall for their propaganda, can't you see the rise in crime and immigration is deliberately engineered to make the populous accept such measures?
 
AJUK said:
No, it is about controlling us. Don't fall for their propaganda, can't you see the rise in crime and immigration is deliberately engineered to make the populous accept such measures?
Click to expand...

No I can't see that. What I can see is the public complaining for so long about the state of our borders and when something is done to try and rectify the situation its suddenly 1984.
 
It's a stupid, inefficient and wildly unpopular decision. A great deal of fuss, money, bureaucracy and hassle could be saved by simply checking the passports of everyone who enters or leaves the country, regardless of whether or not they are citizens (as we do in Australia).

That's all you need.
 
Evangelion said:
It's a stupid, inefficient and wildly unpopular decision. A great deal of fuss, money, bureaucracy and hassle could be saved by simply checking the passports of everyone who enters or leaves the country, regardless of whether or not they are citizens (as we do in Australia).

That's all you need.
Click to expand...

I completely agree with this but our government are too tight to pay for the immigration officers to do so!
 
It is the principle of problem:reaction:solution. They create the problem by allowing every Thomaz, Winston and Abdul into the country and propagate a climate of distrust, disharmony and fear. The average punter in the street gets mightily annoyed and calls for action, the government introduce draconian laws to control the problem they created in the first place. The by product is that they control the average citizen a little bit more than they did before. Global warming = more taxes, petty crime = cctv, terrorism = loss of liberty and privacy. Problem:reaction:solution. They create the problem, we react, they provide the solution, except that the solution was always part of their plan.
 
AJUK said:
...and still people call me a nutjob because I see what is happening and try to inform the sheep about it.

Wake up people, ffs! How much more can we take before we have to push back? If you have a child, look into their eyes and ask yourself what sort of country and world would you like them to live their lives in, certainly not one like this. These people are insane. :mad:
Click to expand...


Yep yep, compared to countries like Iran, Pakistan, India, China, or even the US. You're barking mad.

Just out of interest, what country would you like your children to grow up in?
 
AJUK said:
It is the principle of problem:reaction:solution. They create the problem by allowing every Thomaz, Winston and Abdul into the country and propagate a climate of distrust, disharmony and fear. The average punter in the street gets mightily annoyed and calls for action, the government introduce draconian laws to control the problem they created in the first place. The by product is that they control the average citizen a little bit more than they did before. Global warming = more taxes, petty crime = cctv, terrorism = loss of liberty and privacy. Problem:reaction:solution. They create the problem, we react, they provide the solution, except that the solution was always part of their plan.
Click to expand...

I am not going to try and convince you otherwise. We will have to agree to disagree on the matter though as I definitely do not subscribe to this.
 
AJUK said:
...and still people call me a nutjob because I see what is happening and try to inform the sheep about it.

Wake up people, ffs! How much more can we take before we have to push back? If you have a child, look into their eyes and ask yourself what sort of country and world would you like them to live their lives in, certainly not one like this. These people are insane. :mad:
Click to expand...

But the courts won't allow such blatent infringement of 'constitutional rights'. You seem to imply there is no protection from Government, when there is.

Read here:
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200506/ldjudgmt/jd051013/jack-1.htm

Lord Steyn said:
In exceptional circumstances involving an attempt to abolish judicial review or the ordinary courts [the courts] may have to consider whether this is a constitutional fundamental which even a complaisant House of Commons cannot abolish.
Click to expand...

Lady Hale said:
The courts will treat with particular suspicion (and might even reject) any attempt to subvert the rule of law by removing governmental action affecting the rights of the individual from all judicial powers.
Click to expand...

Lord Hope said:
It is no longer right to say that [Parliament’s] freedom to legislate admits of no qualification.

...

The rule of law enforced by the courts is the controlling principle upon our constitution is based.
Click to expand...

The courts have quashed governmental decisions based on unquantified 'constitutional rights' before and they can do it again.
 
Last edited:
You can call me mad, fine. If I am wrong, I will be just another nutter and you can laugh at me. If I am right, we are all ******. When it all goes Pete Tong, I won't say I told you so.

All I will say is that everyday more and more people are waking up, let's hope we are all awake before our nightmares begin. :(
 
AJUK said:
It is the principle of problem:reaction:solution. They create the problem by allowing every Thomaz, Winston and Abdul into the country and propagate a climate of distrust, disharmony and fear. The average punter in the street gets mightily annoyed and calls for action, the government introduce draconian laws to control the problem they created in the first place. The by product is that they control the average citizen a little bit more than they did before. Global warming = more taxes, petty crime = cctv, terrorism = loss of liberty and privacy. Problem:reaction:solution. They create the problem, we react, they provide the solution, except that the solution was always part of their plan.
Click to expand...

What do they get out of it? I mean, considering that government has the potential to change every 4 years, what exactly do they get out of it? 4 years of lulz?

It seems an excruciatingly inefficient way to control a population, particularly when you have no guarantee that you'll remain in power from one election to the next.

If they were really powerful, they'd remove our ability to remove them. And yet... they don't. They remain slaves to the whim of the voter. Strange that they never seem to do something about it, eh?
 
AJUK said:
You can call me mad, fine. If I am wrong, I will be just another nutter and you can laugh at me. If I am right, we are all ******. When it all goes Pete Tong, I won't say I told you so.

All I will say is that everyday more and more people are waking up, let's hope we are all awake before our nightmares begin. :(
Click to expand...

Can you answer my question please? Which country do you feel you'd like to raise your children in instead of the UK?
 
Thinking that a change of party in administration makes any difference is naive in the extreme. You can't slide a piece of paper between the policies of Labour, Conservatives and LibDems, Democrat or Republican.
 
Why is everyone getting so worked up about it? It doesn't seem like it's anything more than what the USA requests every time a visitor crosses its borders..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom