[Politics] Should Prince Charles be speaking out about the Rwanda deportations?

[Icy Gull]

Aren’t there a range of possibilities here.

At one extreme, Charles has deliberately engineered a “leak” to the press to comment on something he has strong feelings about, which would be understandable but very wrong.
At the other, someone has made a few quid out of revealing the details of a conversation to the press and even as we speak - or write - there’s a frantic hunt going on to find out how it happened.

Either way, I would have reservations about Charles. I abhor the Rwanda thing, but it was revealed a while ago about his letters to ministers about things he was seeking to influence, mainly about building plans and reflecting his ante-diluvian views on architecture, which are a matter of his own personal taste.

Mind you, I seem to remember that the Sun revealed pre Referendum that the Queen supported Brexit, which I didn’t believe for a minute, which also raises the possibility that someone made it up.

There are, and no I do not believe the Queen supported Brexit but I doubt we’ll know in her lifetime. Maybe Charles will reveal all once he’s King

 

[Eric the meek]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visa_policy_of_Rwanda

'All visitors must hold a passport valid for at least six months with at least one empty page.'

What are the implications of that for the asylum seekers and refugees then? Have the UK government organised a waiver? Where will they be held while a temporary visa is sorted out? Or is Rwanda's visa policy out the window?

I hope that journalists have booked their seats on Tuesday's flight to Kigali. I feel there may be a story here.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

doh !!!!
once they cross a country where they can require immigration status ie turkey , greece , italy , france they are illegal . Fact get it into your thick mind .

I have read the United Nations convention on refugees and asylum seekers 1951, as signed by Winston Churchill.
I would rather be thick than racist.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Mail on Sunday and the Sunday Express both very upset that Prince Charles is " meddling in politics " regarding forced transportation to Rwanda...after all its newspapers like them that are supposed to decide what the government should do....silly Prince Charles.

Continuing to stir up something that happened three days ago. The BBC featured it on every news bulletin on the tv and radio yesterday.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Until yesterday hadn’t posted since 2016.
So which one are you?
Ppf or Baker Lite?

I reckon it’s ppf. Look at the spaces after words before commas and full stops. Posters can start second accounts but they can’t hide their grammatical errors.

 

[Is it PotG?]

If one of them had changed their username, they would still be on my ignore list, but I can see this one.

Ah, the old ignore list.

An interesting concept. You may disagree with other people, and argue with them, but to me 'ignoring' is akin to sticking fingers in the ear, singing la la la la and reading a biased newspaper for the rest of your life. Their views still remain, and not listening/reading them surely gives a false feeling of being cocooned in perfectness.

Ready to be placed (if not already) on ignore......

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Ah, the old ignore list.

An interesting concept. You may disagree with other people, and argue with them, but to me 'ignoring' is akin to sticking fingers in the ear, singing la la la la and reading a biased newspaper for the rest of your life. Their views still remain, and not listening/reading them surely gives a false feeling of being cocooned in perfectness.

Ready to be placed (if not already) on ignore......

It’s the equivalent of moving away from the old bore in a pub, and sitting with your mates. We’ve all done it. I prefer to find my facts elsewhere than read/listen to old bores.

 

[Is it PotG?]

It’s the equivalent of moving away from the old bore in a pub, and sitting with your mates. We’ve all done it. I prefer to find my facts elsewhere than read/listen to old bores.

Depends on your definition,and your mates, of facts. Fair enough though.

 

[BadFish]

Ah, the old ignore list.

An interesting concept. You may disagree with other people, and argue with them, but to me 'ignoring' is akin to sticking fingers in the ear, singing la la la la and reading a biased newspaper for the rest of your life. Their views still remain, and not listening/reading them surely gives a false feeling of being cocooned in perfectness.

Ready to be placed (if not already) on ignore......

Some posts barely qualify as 'views'.

The ignore list is more the equivalent of not buying the Sun, Mirror Mail etc.

You can still get your opposing views from the Guardian, telegraph etc

You just avoid the drivel.

For the record I only have one on my ignore list I think. It was more about tedious nonsense being posted rather than a different viewpoint. (although I do admit that there ae a few posters that I don't bother reading - for the same reason as above).

 

[Fungus]

Second accounts.

Yea, style seems very familiar…

 

[WATFORD zero]

Your having a laugh aren’t you ? Have a look at the person per square mile compared to the rest of europe .
we would not need so many doctors if we didn’t have so many people

Until yesterday hadn’t posted since 2016.
So which one are you?
Ppf or Baker Lite?

It appears there's a few recently departed trying to surreptitiously creep back on for their NSC fix

I don't think [MENTION=15922]Working class pride[/MENTION] is on this thread to school us - he's simply on a fake news mission to get the thread into the pit.

An account that hasn't posted for over 5 years suddenly springs into life today ?

Now, call me an old cynic, but I wonder who's been stopped from posting, or seriously embarrassed themselves on other accounts recently

 

[Hugo Rune]

Ah, the old ignore list.

An interesting concept. You may disagree with other people, and argue with them, but to me 'ignoring' is akin to sticking fingers in the ear, singing la la la la and reading a biased newspaper for the rest of your life. Their views still remain, and not listening/reading them surely gives a false feeling of being cocooned in perfectness.

Ready to be placed (if not already) on ignore......

I don’t think there is anything wrong with blocking someone who gives fact and opinion equal weighting in reference to truth?

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

I reckon it’s ppf. Look at the spaces after words before commas and full stops. Posters can start second accounts but they can’t hide their grammatical errors.

Spaces before full stops is classic Bushy. I do hope it isn't him - not healthy for either us or him.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Don’t agree with you mate . This country is full up as it is , your the first to moan that their is no schools to put your kids in , the trains are packed , nhs waiting lists , can’t get a doctors appointment , austerity . F—k me you can’t have it all ways . This country is over whelmed with people . give it a rest it has to stop sometime . And before you say it i am not racist !
Get a grip !

Hello Bushy.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Do Liz/Charles have any more real world influence than the Dutch, Swedish or Danish royal familIes?

Here they’re just titular, signing things they have no say in purely as a historical custom, attending the opening of Parliament.

Charles is not adored by the great British public, probably just widespread indifference. People do not look to his next random musing. He’ll be liked today by some people, only because they agree with him. A bit like with Piers Morgan …. lefties liked in the first months of the pandemic when he was a rent-a-gob in attacking the government, then the very same people hated him just months later when he attacked Megan Markle. Like the Archbishops of York and Canterbury, Charles is an anachronism ignored by almost everyone.

I'm obviously neither left nor right since I always loathed Morgan.

As for Charles, I heard about his comment on the radio and didn't even bother mentioning it to the missus. There is no way I would ever try to justify a view because Charles supports it.

The fact is that the Rwanda gambit is wrong for numerous reasons, most of which boil down to the desire to tummy-tickle a certain type of gammon, the very same gammon who are now raving about the outrageous prince speaking out of turn.

Not sure this has much to do with left and right, more to do with the irredeemably stupid, and the rest of us (who range from a bit stupid to not stupid).

 

[kevo]

Same nsc as before , thought it had changed . Answer the question , i repeat , once they cross a country where they can claim asylum at the first country they cross then any further country they cross then that is illegal , christ it is not that hard .
No way am i a nazi , i lost relatives to them . Just get yourself into realism . England is over subscribed . Austerity ? I guess you were the same person who was against it , meaning about shortage of schools , shortage of the nhs and you just blame it on the Tories . Think about it it for once .

Looking at your posting history, you rarely post anything about football and hardly ever about Brighton. Do you even know the names of any of our players? You just use this platform to disseminate your far-right views.

 

[WATFORD zero]

I'm obviously neither left nor right since I always loathed Morgan.

As for Charles, I heard about his comment on the radio and didn't even bother mentioning it to the missus. There is no way I would ever try to justify a view because Charles supports it.

The fact is that the Rwanda gambit is wrong for numerous reasons, most of which boil down to the desire to tummy-tickle a certain type of gammon, the very same gammon who are now raving about the outrageous prince speaking out of turn.

Not sure this has much to do with left and right, more to do with the irredeemably stupid, and the rest of us (who range from a bit stupid to not stupid).

In a nutshell

 

[carlzeiss]

Instead of criticizing the government why not do something constructive such as offering Balmoral Castle , Sandringham Estate and other under utilized Royal Family property's as temporary housing for refugees .

 

[Springal]

Of course Charles is right to. When the governments own report in 2021 called out Rwanda for having a poor human rights record - including: (source https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/37th-universal-periodic-review-uk-statement-on-rwanda)

We recommend that Rwanda:

- Conduct transparent, credible and independent investigations into allegations of extrajudicial killings, deaths in custody, enforced disappearances and torture, and bring perpetrators to justice.

- Protect and enable journalists to work freely, without fear of retribution, and ensure that state authorities comply with the Access to Information law.

- Screen, identify and provide support to trafficking victims, including those held in Government transit centres.



Then why now is it seemingly ok to send anyone in our care there ? I’ve not seen any updated report that suggests these concerns have been satisfied.

 

[Blue Valkyrie]

doh !!!!
once they cross a country where they can require immigration status ie turkey , greece , italy , france they are illegal . Fact get it into your thick mind .

This post troubles me.

I know nothing about immigration law as it doesn't particularly interest me.

So is this true or dangerous misinformation?