When the UK government gives Thaksin his political asylum, Gordon Brown should offer him a post in the government he should fit in well with the re-appointed Peter Mandleson.
0
Thaksin And Pojaman Apply For Asylum In England
Started by george, 2008-10-06 11:59
#51
Newbie Posted 2008-10-06 14:13:45 When the UK government gives Thaksin his political asylum, Gordon Brown should offer him a post in the government he should fit in well with the re-appointed Peter Mandleson.
#52
Expat Member™ Posted 2008-10-06 14:17:11
Be careful all British.
If PAD starts protests at UK embassy, you'll be in trouble getting in. #53
Platinum Member Posted 2008-10-06 14:19:15
When the UK government gives Thaksin his political asylum, Gordon Brown should offer him a post in the government he should fit in well with the re-appointed Peter Mandleson.Maybe that is exactly why he was advised to apply for political Asylum, they need a clever man to line their pockets!? Or will he be the first President of the UK? 
#54
Senior Member Posted 2008-10-06 14:22:31
This can be very complicated to explain to people that are not from the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. But here goes. [...] Cheers, Rick Very good reply, Rick. For a more in-depth look at the terminology of the British Isles look here. #55
Newbie Posted 2008-10-06 14:22:56
your third paragraph is totally inaccurate. the act of union was between england and wales only. scotland and northern ireland are countries within the uk.
the original post got it spot on.
Oh dear here we go again. England = Britain = UK. England = England. Sad that English people are the only nationality in the world who do not know their own country's name or borders. Bulls**t.....I'm British and know it. I was born in England of a half English, half Scottish father and a half English, half Irish mother. My passport is issued by "The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland" commonly known as "The UK" and inside it says Nationality: British Citizen. The United Kingdom of Great Britain consists of a Union between England, Scotland and Wales plus some outlying islands making up the geographical area "British Isles", "Britain" or "Great Britain". You are always British first, English, Scottish or Welsh etc. second..... But why we don't have a national British football team beats me and sadly here in Thailand most Thais only seem to know names of countries football teams hence the use of "I'm English" or "I'm Scottish" and never "I'm British". And if I'm getting my history timeline correct "The English" aka Angrit came to Thailand before the forming of the United Kingdom. #56
Advanced Member Posted 2008-10-06 14:23:08
This appears to be the best SIMPLIFIED definition I could find from UNHCR for a reason to consider political asylum.
"Unjustly exiled from their home country, refugees are persons forced to migrate to a new country for security and protection. The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (the UN refugee agency) legally defines refugees as “people who are outside their countries because of a well-founded fear of persecution based on their race, religion, nationality, political opinion or social group.”" UK Immigration also say: "While many come to UK in the hope of finding sanctuary, others realise only after arrival that circumstances in their country have changed and that it would not be safe for them or their families to return." #57
No-longer bothering with TV Posted 2008-10-06 14:23:21
When the UK government gives Thaksin his political asylum, Gordon Brown should offer him a post in the government he should fit in well with the re-appointed Peter Mandleson.http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/Gordon-Brown...le-t215836.html Edited by phaethon, 2008-10-06 14:26:35. #58
Super Member Posted 2008-10-06 14:25:53
I'm not a Brit' but it will be a sad day if they grant toxin and pokeman asylum - pokeman is now a convicted criminal who skipped bail on the assurance she would return to LOS and the other half is just waiting to be convicted.
Will this set a precident that any criminal can now apply to enter the UK. #59
International Gypsy Member Posted 2008-10-06 14:29:07
He gets UK (or any other country) asylum and he will always be the PAD and elitists boogie man in the dark.
Bring him here, try him, jail him and he will STILL be the PAD and elitists boogie man in the dark, just a lot nearer home and more dangerous. Taksin wins, PAD and the elitists loses either way. Times are changing, Pandora's Box has been opened, the cat is out of the bag, you can't put back the clock.... Oh dear, what a pity, never mind. But passport burning? WTF is that all about? You claim to be British but you despise your citizenship and birthright so much just to make some futile statement about a rich criminal in a third world country that doesn't even accept you as an equal? Why aren't you camping out at Government House already? Oh... I see, it's hot, you don't like spicy food, can't speak the language and never did like crowds of foreigners anyway. After all these years too. #60
Senior Member Posted 2008-10-06 14:29:52
It was a lot more interesting when girls burnt bras to protest. Yes, as long as they were slim, attractive, and 36C or below. But those ladies never did.........sigh Realise off thread....... Pom sia jai (sic) #61
Advanced Member Posted 2008-10-06 14:30:01
Maybe we could capitalise on this and grant him asylum if he give us a few hundred million to help out with the credit crunch.
Edited by chameleon1977, 2008-10-06 14:30:35. #62
Senior Member Posted 2008-10-06 14:30:28
I'll publicly burn my UK passport outside the Bangkok Embassy if they are granted asylum. #63
Expat Member™ Posted 2008-10-06 14:35:26
When the UK government gives Thaksin his political asylum, Gordon Brown should offer him a post in the government he should fit in well with the re-appointed Peter Mandleson.Maybe that is exactly why he was advised to apply for political Asylum, they need a clever man to line their pockets!? Or will he be the first President of the UK? No, he's dream is to be King.
#64
Senior Member Posted 2008-10-06 14:39:34
your third paragraph is totally inaccurate. the act of union was between england and wales only. scotland and northern ireland are countries within the uk. the original post got it spot on.
Oh dear here we go again. England = Britain = UK. England = England. Sad that English people are the only nationality in the world who do not know their own country's name or borders. Bulls**t.....I'm British and know it. I was born in England of a half English, half Scottish father and a half English, half Irish mother. My passport is issued by "The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland" commonly known as "The UK" and inside it says Nationality: British Citizen. The United Kingdom of Great Britain consists of a Union between England, Scotland and Wales plus some outlying islands making up the geographical area "British Isles", "Britain" or "Great Britain". You are always British first, English, Scottish or Welsh etc. second..... But why we don't have a national British football team beats me and sadly here in Thailand most Thais only seem to know names of countries football teams hence the use of "I'm English" or "I'm Scottish" and never "I'm British". And if I'm getting my history timeline correct "The English" aka Angrit came to Thailand before the forming of the United Kingdom. http://en.wikipedia...._United_Kingdom states: The history of the United Kingdom—British history— as an unified sovereign state begins with the legistlative union between the kingdoms of England and Scotland on 1 May 1707. England and Wales and Scotland had been in personal union since the Union of the Crowns in 1603, when James VI of Scotland succeeded his cousin Elizabeth I as James I of England. In the ensuing century powerful sectarian and political differences divided the kingdoms, however under the Acts of Union 1707 England and Scotland were unified as the Kingdom of Great Britain, sharing a single constitutional monarch and parliament at Westminster. There was a UNION between England and Scotland in 1707 as well as a prior UNION between England, Wales and Scotland in 1603. There never was a separate England and Wales only union. And are you trying to say Wales is not a country? I'm sure a few million Welsh would disagree with that..... So you are wrong........ #65
I am here, where are you? Posted 2008-10-06 14:46:02
Perhaps Thaksin will get all these questions about the history of England or the UK prior to getting Asylum. RE: The Good Citizens Test.
Edited by TEFLMike, 2008-10-06 14:53:12. #66
Expat Member™ Posted 2008-10-06 14:49:49
perhaps Thakin will get all these questions about the history of England or the UK prior to getting Asylum. RE: The Good Citizens Test. Thaksin: Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, is that the poor provinces where it's easy to by votes? #67
Super Member Posted 2008-10-06 14:51:55
The thing that comes to mind in reading this thread is whether events since the coup - the new Constitution, the PAD demonstrations, the idea of the 'New Politics', the stance of the military, the Samak episode, etcetera - have made it more or less likely that Thaksin will gain political asylum. I suspect that the British government will see these things differently from most posters here. It will be interesting to see what arguments are deployed.
#68
Senior Member Posted 2008-10-06 14:58:03
They let everybody else live in the UK,Terrorists,etc,so why not two on the run as well. I am sure our stupid government will give them a British Passport,and of course 24 hour Police protection,not forgetting they will be able too claim every State Benefit going,all at our taxpayers expense.  Send them both back to Thailand too face the music. What is wrong with Mr. Taksin??? I ask you he is well off, has family well respected in Thailand but not with PAD. geeee I love him. But for England . huh, they sure love him coz he has money (am I wrong or am I wrong  ) England will take anybody , sure as long as they can benefit from them. Ask yourself would Mr. Taksin be welcome if he was broke???? haaaaaaaaaaaa. nopeee 
#69
Member Posted 2008-10-06 15:00:08
maybe the thai govt issues many warrants for him,
but i love to see him live there forever. he is unwanted here as a free man. however, the prison here would happy to have a him. i would be so sorry if eng govt would grant him his request. that shows eng doesn't care what a person has done in other place. that's truely sad. #70
Advanced Member Posted 2008-10-06 15:05:29
I am inclined to think along the lines of a couple of posts here and question whether the government of Thailand will actively pursue Thaksin and his missus. At least until the Charter is changed to suit them.
I think we should all be a little suspicious about the delay in withdrawing the special passports they carry. Well now they have signalled their intention to seek protection from the British government that passport question is mute. Cancel them, if the Thailand government is fair dinkum. At least give the appearance of being upset. It will be interesting to watch this thing play out. #71
Senior Member Posted 2008-10-06 15:10:58
I'll publicly burn my UK passport outside the Bangkok Embassy if they are granted asylum. I hasve your matches ready.....the UK governments history is in favor of low lifes...why should they change now on who they let stay. #72
Sabai Sabai Member Posted 2008-10-06 15:13:39
It would appear that someone has told the powers that be that this is quite enough of this nonsense.
Chamlong is arrested, Thaksin applies for asylum. Face is given, taken away, favours earned and owed in the blink of an eye. What odds that very shortly PPP gives way "partially" to PAD requests so that the country appears to get back to some kind of normality? #73
Remember this member Posted 2008-10-06 15:14:47
They let everybody else live in the UK,Terrorists,etc,so why not two on the run as well. I am sure our stupid government will give them a British Passport,and of course 24 hour Police protection,not forgetting they will be able too claim every State Benefit going,all at our taxpayers expense. Send them both back to Thailand too face the music. What is wrong with Mr. Taksin??? I ask you he is well off, has family well respected in Thailand but not with PAD. geeee I love him. But for England . huh, they sure love him coz he has money (am I wrong or am I wrong ) England will take anybody , sure as long as they can benefit from them. Ask yourself would Mr. Taksin be welcome if he was broke???? haaaaaaaaaaaa. nopeee Asylum applications to the UK Under UK immigration rules, asylum is granted only in cases where refugees can prove that if they return to their country of origin they will be persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular group, or political opinion. This is in accordance with the 1951 United Nations (UN) convention relating to the status of refugees (and its 1967 protocol), and article three of the European convention on human rights. The rules exclude the vast majority of refugees currently allowed to stay in the UK under exceptional leave. During 1999 there were 71,000 applications for political asylum in the UK, involving chiefly Kosovar refugees from the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, and, in fewer numbers, Somalis, Sri Lankan Tamils, Afghans, Turkish and Iraqi Kurds, Albanians, and Chinese. By January 2000, there were 105,000 asylum seekers (not counting dependants) who were awaiting a decision on their status or who were appealing expulsion orders. Home Office statistics suggested that 36% of asylum applicants processed in 1999 were genuine refugees, but a further 11% were allowed to remain in the UK on compassionate grounds. Other figures suggested that fewer than 10% of those refused permission to stay had actually been deported (left the country), the remainder having disappeared into the population. New legislation came into effect in the UK on 1 April 2000, which, among other changes, provided for the ‘fast track’ processing of non‐complex cases, replaced welfare benefits with a food voucher system, worth £35 a week for an adult, and allowed asylum seekers to be forcibly dispersed into accommodation around the UK. The new measures enabled the numbers awaiting a decision to fall to around 90,000 by May 2000. However, the indirect and direct cost to the UK of supporting asylum seekers soared to £900 million in the 1999–2000 financial year. Not too many rich people here. Also Taksin has the right to apply on the grounds that he stated that he has had threats on his life in Thailand, be it true or not. By the way i think that he should be sent back to Thailand for trial. Cheers, Rick #74
Senior Member Posted 2008-10-06 15:15:21
I'll publicly burn my UK passport outside the Bangkok Embassy if they are granted asylum. Good, I personally give them my thumbs up when they give him exile. He has done a lot good for the people of Thailand, unlike Chuan, Chavalit, Banharn and lots of others who only filled their pockets. Best joke of it all is that the son of Thailand most corrupt prime minister ever Choonhavan, is lecturing people like you about being an honest politician. I suppose only you believe in them. But never w=mind have a good dream and go for the people of the PAD who are the biggest undemocratic criminals of all. #75
Titanium Member Posted 2008-10-06 15:20:16
This appears to be the best SIMPLIFIED definition I could find from UNHCR for a reason to consider political asylum. "Unjustly exiled from their home country, refugees are persons forced to migrate to a new country for security and protection. The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (the UN refugee agency) legally defines refugees as “people who are outside their countries because of a well-founded fear of persecution based on their race, religion, nationality, political opinion or social group.”" UK Immigration also say: "While many come to UK in the hope of finding sanctuary, others realise only after arrival that circumstances in their country have changed and that it would not be safe for them or their families to return." No doubt in the end money will win out and Thaksin and family will be able to mix with the Russian oligarchs. However, this wont be an asylum case the British government will enjoy. The precedent of asylum being granted when you have your own people in power could have ramifications the government wont like too. Edited to add: When was the last time the Brits also granted asylum to an ex-leader of a government linked to a policy of extra-judicial killings that resulted in sevral thousand deaths (info on this from HRW and Amnesty). Another reason the British government wont like this request. Edited by hammered, 2008-10-06 15:23:46. |
Sponsored by ... |
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users
