You lads can stay but your Mum can do one

Discussion in 'The Intelligence Cell' started by TheIronDuke, Mar 13, 2007.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. TheIronDuke

    TheIronDuke LE Book Reviewer

    Ho bloody hum

    I'm so proud to be a Brit right now, you know?

    I'd do one of those petition things, but latest news is the poor woman is getting on the plane today.
  2. Absolutely disgraceful. I am surprised that they managed to "bowmanise" the aircraft so speedily though! Obviously it's great her sons are here and serving a useful purpose but we obviously don't need mum, so thanks for your cannon fodder children madam and heigh-ho! Another one for adam Ingram to spin his way out of then.

    How will these two young soldiers focus on the job in hand when they will obviously be concerned about their mother's welfare, which the country has decided it is in the public interest to ignore?
  3. She goes but utter fcuking scum from other countries stay despite them contributing nothing to the UK?

    What a disgrace...
  4. Yet another poorly judged decision by our inept government. Surely we welcome immigrants who bring something worthwhile to our country. What could be more worthwhile than TWO sons serving in our overstretched, undermanned armed forces?
  5. Im sure that the redtops and hate mail will spin it too too suit there theme of the day .... immigrants good immigrants bad .... good lord when will the stupidity end
  6. TheIronDuke

    TheIronDuke LE Book Reviewer

    You'd like to think so, eh?

    Arent our taxes currently being used to recruit nurses to the NHS from all around the world? Or is that somebody elses taxes? Wouldnt it be cheaper and better to LET HER STAY AND QUALIFY?

    Our Government says...

    Oh yeah? And a robust approach to using their next of kin to recruit ethnic minorities?

    I'll leave it now, before I start posting in BOLD CAPS
  7. Alsacien

    Alsacien LE Moderator

    Poor woman probably had the misfortune to have an address and nationality that was in the database of NOK details.
    The Home Orifice know the whereabouts of so few immigrants they had to fill the quotas somehow......
  8. Actually their not. Most of the nurses I train can't get jobs as the trusts can't afford to pay them after they have paid the hundreds of people who check to see if the trust is meeting is next set of targets or not.

    Managers, not doctors no run the NHS. Maybe we should get the doctors to run the civil service.
  9. Local (North East) news reported tonight that her deportation has been delayed because her 15 year old daughter is in the midst of her GCSEs. Never mind about the two lads who served in the the army, or HER contribution to society, - let's not upset the PC brigade.


    Vitriolic 70 year old, York.
  10. Bang on!!! Cannot believe the brass neck of this goverment, they've shot themselves in the foot so many times that they must now be up for a "Darwin award" for their standards of stupidity. :threaten:

    We are proud of your boys efforts, serving in the army of the country whose morally corrupt goverment served you so disgracefully.

    edited for angry typing!
  11. Playing Devil's Advocate here and prepared for incoming, but are these the same ARRSErs who are so vitriolic on other threads when it comes to booting out asylum seekers?

    I do not doubt that this lady has skills that could benefit our society. Unfortunately the same rules that the baying masses want applied elsewhere have been applied here. The fact that her sons serve is really neither here nor there. As commonwealth citizens they have that right (they may even have UK citizenship for all we know), but it is really not relevant.

    You can sympathise with personal circumstances and if her daughter is about to take exams then presumably that would have been considered in the appeals process. But you cannot have it both ways. This government has been accused of double standards in many forums-nand trust me I dispise this government-but the rules are the rules.
  12. TheIronDuke

    TheIronDuke LE Book Reviewer

    Probabally. My view? If a 1st generation immigrant is convicted of a crime that could carry a prison sentence, boot them.

    I would hope someone in Government would look at each case on its merits. But then I hope theres fairies at the bottom of my garden.

    She is indeed off the hook. For now (linky)
  13. This is very disturbing; two decent sons serving Britain whilst their mother who tries to serve a useful purpose is sent back to face a real threat.

    The answer as to why is obvious. Mrs Bowman was not a burden on society, she didn't bring anti social diseases here and didn't take a bed on the NHS after lying about being a mature student.

    What is wrong with this poxy country that it returns decent persons and keeps the shíte that washes up unwanted on our shores?

    How come they kept the shítebag 'Makosi' who welched on her contract to train as a nurse because she 'might' have been at risk in South Africa because of her antics on TV yet returned a decent woman to face a certain threat?
  14. Also discussed here.

    I've vented my anger at asylum seekers who, whilst living here, has committed a serious crime that should entitled them to an instant boot of the country, not proven their reason of threat for coming here in the first place or have brought their entire family and pet cat to live in the same home once they've got their foot onto the council property ladder and none of them are working/studying. I've had the wonderful experience of the last example living next door to me which is probably why I would moan about it. I've no problem with anyone coming here, intergrating, wanting to be treated like as everyone else and postively contributing to society.
  15. She sought assylum and consequently was not allowed to work, so presumably she was housed and maintained at our expense.

    Makosi has not been granted assylum, she is no more entitled to it than Mrs Bowman. A tribunal has ruled that it is not presently safe to return her to Zimbabwe (in fact there has been a ruling that means it is not safe to return anyone to zimbabwe), when it is she will have to go.

    Mrs Bowman may well feel threatened by her ex husband, but that isn't ground for being given assylum. If it were then anyone could claim that they felt threatened by someone in their own nation and then be allowed to stay here indefinitely. The fact is that Jamaica has laws to protect her that are enforced fairly by its government. It is not our job to protect everyone who is threatened by someone in their homeland (or as in this case, someone who isn't being threatened but thinks an ex husband might find her and might then theaten her).

    devexwarrior hit the nail on the head for me. Whatever laws we have must be enforced fairly and equally. The fact that this ladies sons served is not relevant. As it happens I think our immigration laws are grossly unfair in many instances (and as my wife is an immigrant I have had relatives refused entry for the flimsiest of reasons when they have come to the UK to visit), but unless people are prepared to support fairer laws (which seems unlikely given the public appetite for making immigration more difficult) then those laws are what we must live with.