Mailwatch(ed) Forum

Occurs to me that Labour could have some fun by doing the open letter stunt, and refer to the Tories as "the political wing of the EDL".

Then again, that might just boost the Tories' numbers...

Incredible, if he's got this right.

The actual Home Secretary. "The Coutts Scandal" being a bank deciding who it wanted to do business with.

What's sinister about a company in the "Diversity, Equity and Inclusion industry" not wanting to do business with an arsehole who repeatedly sticks two fingers up at diversity, and has shown time and again that he is not interested in inclusiveness?

If he doesn't want to play nicely with the other kids he can sit in the corner and play with himself.

"Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Industry" is a funny way of referring to a bank.

I don't recall Ms. Braverman or any of her ilk giving out when KGBN suspended Guto Harri from his presenting job with them when he appeared to offended that station's values by taking a knee on camera.

We've now seen Frost, Sunak and Braverman expend public time and expense on batting for Farage.

There are far greater issues facing the country, than one political heckler being unable to join a millionaire's bank.

Have we ever seen so many cabinet members make so much fuss over a trivial issue?
Evidence that they're incapable of running the country.
Evidence that they only govern for millionaires.

Yug wrote: ↑Wed Jul 19, 2023 8:41 pm What's sinister about a company in the "Diversity, Equity and Inclusion industry" not wanting to do business with an arsehole who repeatedly sticks two fingers up at diversity, and has shown time and again that he is not interested in inclusiveness?

If he doesn't want to play nicely with the other kids he can sit in the corner and play with himself.

He looks like the type who plays with himself a lot.

Expect some "bus nutter" level rhetoric about tofu, recycling and fifteen minute cities from Braverman.

Bones McCoy wrote: ↑Wed Jul 19, 2023 10:42 pm We've now seen Frost, Sunak and Braverman expend public time and expense on batting for Farage.

There are far greater issues facing the country, than one political heckler being unable to join a millionaire's bank.

Have we ever seen so many cabinet members make so much fuss over a trivial issue?
Evidence that they're incapable of running the country.
Evidence that they only govern for millionaires.

They know the end is coming soon. Out of office and time to choose a new leader. Fargle may not be a member of the party, but he occupies a special place in the hearts of many of its members. Who cheered for him the most might be a crucial question come the next leadership election. Same as with the Dan Wootton business.

Come to think of it, isn't average GBN viewing figures about the same as Conservative Party membership?

And as for Sunak, that leadership challenge may very well come before the next General election. Super Thursday and that.

This is simply astonishing - the Home Secretary has personally intervened to prevent a man from returning to the U.K. despite his one historic ‘crime’ being well below the threshold for barring entry. It’s Braverman’s usual callousness, but turned up to 11. If this is some sort of effort to ignite a culture war I can’t see it doing anything but backfiring. It’s just far too cruel.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... SApp_Other

Sadly, I think she'll be delighted with "I barred drug dealer".

A lot of people have kids and have smoked a doobie or two so even the dumbest of person might show a bit of empathy on that one.
No one wants to have a conversation about what illegal immigrants are doing in this country to survive. Particularly mouthy racist white van man who likes a bit of cash in hand work.

Career Crminal breaks law (again)

Suella Braverman broke law by denying asylum seekers £3 a week, judge rules

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/202 ... udge-rules

The home secretary acted unlawfully in failing to provide basic support to asylum seekers, including young children and pregnant women, a judge has ruled.

Suella Braverman must introduce changes that will benefit thousands of asylum seekers after five successfully challenged the home secretary in the high court.

Another slap in the chops for the Department of Vindictive Xenophobes

A high court judge has ordered the home secretary to change a key part of a trafficking policy introduced just months ago.

In an urgent hearing on Wednesday, lawyers representing trafficking victims said they were at risk of human rights violations such as slavery, servitude and forced labour if the policy continued.

In January the government introduced new rules restricting protection and support for victims of modern slavery.

One of the changes is that potential trafficking victims who have a criminal conviction are no longer automatically assessed for the support trafficking victims can access. This support may include accommodation, counselling and financial assistance.

Human rights and anti-trafficking campaigners argue that this exclusion could force some victims back into the hands of their traffickers. They include people forced to cultivate cannabis and convicted in connection with this, people forced into sex work and county lines victims...

https://amp.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... ng-victims

Since Braverman took office, has anything the Home Office tried to do passed the courts without comment?

Eastern Promises, the Braverman cut.

"Yeah, you may have been trafficked here, but you did work as a hooker so fuck you."

Just another day at the Department of Rampant Racism and Xenophobia

Disabled asylum seekers, torture victims and migrants who have suffered “traumatic experiences at sea” are among those that the Home Office has attempted to put on board the Bibby Stockholm – in violation of its own rules.

The Independent understands that a man who is blind in one eye, another partially-sighted person, and migrants with phobias of water were issued with transfer orders that were successfully challenged by lawyers.

The department has so far been forced to reverse decisions to move at least 20 people and is now facing a wider challenge against the Bibby Stockholm.

Steve Smith, chief executive of refugee charity Care4Calais, said all of the asylum seekers it was supporting had their transfers to the barge “cancelled” after lawyers wrote to the Home Office.

“Amongst our clients are people who are disabled, who have survived torture and modern slavery and who have had traumatic experiences at sea,” he added.

“To house any human being in a ‘quasi-floating prison’ like the Bibby Stockholm is inhumane. To try and do so with this group of people is unbelievably cruel.”...

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/h ... 89045.html

Off-topic aside: I hate the way the Independent puts a huge block of adverts after every sentence. To me, it makes them resemble the Daily Express and undermines their claim to be a responsible news outlet.

Yug wrote: ↑Wed Jul 19, 2023 8:41 pm What's sinister about a company in the "Diversity, Equity and Inclusion industry" not wanting to do business with an arsehole who repeatedly sticks two fingers up at diversity, and has shown time and again that he is not interested in inclusiveness?

If he doesn't want to play nicely with the other kids he can sit in the corner and play with himself.

Apparently it's the new "end of the world" lost cause in the USA.
They just call it DEI there.

Guvnor Ron in Florida's going to bankrupt Disney by outlawing it and then going after all their brown actor casting choices.

This reflects well on Braverman's pet project

The Government's claim that Rwanda is a safe place to send asylum seekers has been savaged as figures showed the UK has granted sanctuary to dozens from the African nation.

Ministers are locked in a bitter court battle trying to salvage their controversial deportation scheme after top judges said it was unlawful. While they maintain Rwanda is a safe country, analysis of official data reveals that over 40 Rwandans have applied for asylum in the UK since 2020.

And between 2011 and 2021, 37 people were granted asylum after officials accepted they were unsafe in their home country. Immigration expert Prof Thom Brooks, of the University of Durham, told The Mirror: "While we are told Rwanda is safe for all, the Home Office recognises that it is not safe for all Rwandans. It is unclear how Rwanda can be safe for all from any country if not safe for every Rwandan."..

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/ ... 750899.amp

The government's appeal may not go quite the way they want it to.


Edit to add the link

I don't normally double post like this, but the Home Office is the gift that keeps on giving

More than 100 people recruited to work as guards at the Manston camp in Kent have spent months on full pay without being allowed to do any work, the Guardian has learned.

Manston, near Ramsgate, which processes asylum seekers who arrive in the UK on small boats, was hit by a series of crises last year. An outbreak of diphtheria led to one man dying after falling ill with the infection. There were also reports of filthy conditions, assaults by some contractors and groups of asylum seekers being taken from the camp and dumped in the streets of central London.

New guards, known as detention custody officers, are being recruited to manage small boat arrivals over the next few months after complaints of staff shortages during the busiest period at the site last year.

All new recruits must go through rigorous security checks, something that has been universally welcomed.

However, after recruits have completed their training and initial security checks they are waiting several months for the Home Office to complete the checks and issue accreditation before they are allowed to start working. During this period they are on full pay of £32,500 a year.

One source said: “There are people who completed their training and basic security checks as far back as May. They are keen to start work at Manston but cannot do so until their Home Office accreditation comes through. They are being paid a full salary to do nothing.”...

https://amp.theguardian.com/uk-news/202 ... start-work

Why were they accepted and given employee status before the background checks had been done? When I joined the MOD I had my job interview in September, and didn't hear anything more until the end of the following January, after the vetting process had been completed. I wish I could have spent those four and a half months on full pay instead of struggling on the dole.

Thanet must have come up in the world if you have to put someone on the payroll before they start a job. No wonder inflation is high.