• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

One for Troll

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    One for Troll

    Gurkhas win right to stay in UK
    Joanna Lumley beside a retired Gurkha
    Actress Joanna Lumley was among those campaigning for the Gurkhas

    A group of retired Gurkhas fighting for the right to settle in Britain have won their immigration test case at London's High Court.

    They were challenging immigration rules which said that those who retired from the British Army before 1997 did not have an automatic right to stay.

    Prominent supporter actress Joanna Lumley said it was a "chance to right a great wrong".

    The government said it would now review all Gurkhas' cases.

    Linky: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7644441.stm

    -------

    Hey Troll, are you okay with that decision or not?

    #2
    Taking an immigration case to the high court? I don't know why they bothered. They should have just floated up the Thames in a dinghy at midnight with their massive knives and done what they effing well liked.

    Comment


      #3
      Originally posted by AtW View Post
      Hey Troll, are you okay with that decision or not?
      Dunno why you ask me as my views are a matter of record - I was a tad peeved off on tonights news when the Gurkha being interviewed said Britain had taken advantage of the Gurkhas, but I thought it was a contract made of free choice.
      But the stuff below still brings a lump to my throat and there really can be no argument against it, especially compared to some of the ethnic sh*te that gets into the country
      In addition to the enormous manpower made available there were many personal gestures on the part of the Minister and Court of Nepal. Large sums of money for the purchase of weapons and equipment, including money for the provision of fighter aircraft during the Battle of Britain, were presented as gifts from Nepal. Considerable sums of money were also donated to the Lord Mayor of London during the Blitz for the relief of victims in the dockland area. An equally generous response was made to a variety of appeals for aid – all this from a country which was then, and still is by western standards, desperately poor.

      The spirit of this friendship can best be illustrated by the reply made to the Prime Minister of Nepal to the British Minister in Kathmandu after the fall of France in 1940. When Britain stood alone.

      Permission was sought to recruit an additional 20 battalions for the Gurkha Brigade, and for Gurkha troops to be allowed to serve in any part of the world. This was readily granted by the Prime Minister who remarked, “Does a friend desert a friend in time of need? If you win, we win with you. If you lose, we lose with you”. The whole of the Nepalese Army was again placed at the disposal of the British Crown.
      How fortunate for governments that the people they administer don't think

      Comment


        #4
        Originally posted by Troll View Post
        I thought it was a contract made of free choice.
        That was unfair contract - there are laws about it and I am glad to hear UK Courts are independent enough to overturn such bad faith contracts given to people who fought for this country.

        I'd say Gurkhas have more right to settle in this country than myself - even though I followed the rules etc. Given how well they fought for this country and did not abandon it after British Empire disappeared I think they deserve UK passports and very generous pension (like any other member of the forces should get).

        UK Army gets pityful salaries while risking their lives in serious hotspots - it is even worse than in previous wars because in current one the main danger comes from mines so you don't get killed but get serious wounds that they suffer for life, better probably being killed by a bomb than that. And they get paid less than Cherie Blair charges in a few hours of her time.

        Comment


          #5
          Originally posted by AtW View Post
          That was unfair contract - there are laws about it and I am glad to hear UK Courts are independent enough to overturn such bad faith contracts given to people who fought for this country.

          I'd say Gurkhas have more right to settle in this country than myself - even though I followed the rules etc. Given how well they fought for this country and did not abandon it after British Empire disappeared I think they deserve UK passports and very generous pension (like any other member of the forces should get).

          UK Army gets pityful salaries while risking their lives in serious hotspots - it is even worse than in previous wars because in current one the main danger comes from mines so you don't get killed but get serious wounds that they suffer for life, better probably being killed by a bomb than that. And they get paid less than Cherie Blair charges in a few hours of her time.
          I suppose you have to compare to what life is like for those who remain in Nepal
          How fortunate for governments that the people they administer don't think

          Comment


            #6
            Originally posted by Troll View Post
            I suppose you have to compare to what life is like for those who remain in Nepal
            No, I suppose you have to compare with what those guys did for the UK. I don't think there are many UK military units that have demonstrated the kind of bravery than those guys - I think Gurkhas never withdrawn without order, and not because they were not involved in serious fights.

            Comment


              #7
              Originally posted by AtW View Post
              No, I suppose you have to compare with what those guys did for the UK. I don't think there are many UK military units that have demonstrated the kind of bravery than those guys - I think Gurkhas never withdrawn without order, and not because they were not involved in serious fights.
              Now you're back to my position - I was discussing whether the contract was 'unfair' or not
              How fortunate for governments that the people they administer don't think

              Comment


                #8
                Originally posted by Troll View Post
                I was discussing whether the contract was 'unfair' or not
                The contract was certainly unfair.

                Comment


                  #9
                  Originally posted by AtW View Post
                  The contract was certainly unfair.
                  with a 2008 retrospective viewpoint lots of things would seem unfair.
                  How fortunate for governments that the people they administer don't think

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Originally posted by Troll View Post
                    with a 2008 retrospective viewpoint lots of things would seem unfair.
                    Well, how about slavery, was it fundamentally unfair wrong practice or not? Or is it only appearing wrong now in 2008?

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X