Yes, just over 6000 years ago, right?

Can I suggest you try this out. Get a one way ticket to Saudi and say the above to passport control. I would pay great money to see the response.

The Saudis wouldn't care. They like immigrant labour.

If you were skilled in the oil industry or some other area that could make them money they could make use of you and if you weren't then you could join the Bangladeshis, Pakistanis, Indians and so on that form an army of dirt cheap slave labour doing household tasks for Saudi families.

Where you would get a laugh is if you started talking about minimum wage, workers rights or industrial tribunals, thats when they'd laugh at you.

I'm not debating that. What I'm debating is how can punishment for attempting to stay in a Country ILLEGALLY be to stay in said Country LEGALLY??

It's rocket science.

He broke the law in THIS country and was therefore tried and sentenced in THIS country (where he broke the law), and the subsequent sentence is then to be completed in THIS country, where the crime occurred and where the trial happened and where the sentence was handed down.

When he decided that he wanted to stay in this country and commit a crime in an effort to do so, he was probably not wanting to spend the remainder of his time in this country in prison. In fact, I'd be prepared to bet that he didn't think to himself: 'Hey, I fancy staying I. The UK for, what ...? How about 12 months longer? But I want to stay in prison during that time and get deported afterwards. Isn't that such a great idea?'

In other words, your continued pretence that he is somehow being rewarded for the crime he committed with exactly what he wanted is plain stupid. And apparently devoid of a fairly basic understanding of the situation.

Correct.

He is still however an illegal immigrant. Instead of deporting and blacklisting him for future VISA applications, we have thrown him in prison for 12 months where the UK tax payer will pay for him. He might be in a cell 22 hours a day or he might have a Wii, PS3 and XBOX 360 who knows, the point is we are paying to house an illegal immigrant who is taking up a prision spot that could be used elsewhere (as could the taxpayers money).

With all the talk at the minute about border control and the amount of illegal immigrants we go and keep one here. Just can't get my head round it.

I suggest you get it examined then.

No he isn't. He was caught attempting to become one. He is now a prisoner. At no point was he actually an illegal immigrant as far as I can tell.


We've imprisoned him prior to deporting him. This isn't the same as 'housing an illegal immigrant' at all - not least because he doesn't appear to have been illegal at the time of the sham wedding.


We're not keeping an illegal immigrant here at all. We've imprisoned a foreign national for breaking a UK law in the UK. Once his sentence is completed we'll deport him. It really isn't difficult, and the fact that even the Sun isn't making a fuss over it should show how straightforward it is.

If somebody breaks our law we have a moral responsibility to ensure that that individual is treated by our legal system which includes the housing of him. Sending a person to another country allows us to wash our hands of the problem and that's not how we should be seeing justice in any country never mind our own.