A culture difference
“Why were you in China?” asked the passport control officer, a woman with the appearance and disposition of a prison matron.
“None of your business,” I said.
Her eyes widened in disbelief.
“Excuse me?” she asked.
“I’m not going to be interrogated as a pre-condition of re-entering my own country,” I said.
This did not go over well. She asked a series of questions, such as how long I had been in China, whether I was there on personal business or commercial business, etc. I stood silently.
It's worth reading the whole post; it's even more worthwhile reading Paul's response to commenters, in which he lays down the rights that he possesses, as an American citizen: one extract struck me particularly...
- A U.S. Citizen Cannot Be Denied Re-Entry To Her Own Country.
A federal judge in Puerto Rico—a territory sensitive to the rights and privileges of its residents' U.S. citizenship—said it best: "The only absolute and unqualified right of citizenship is to residence within the territorial boundaries of the United States; a citizen cannot be either deported or denied reentry." U.S. v. Valentine, 288 F. Supp. 957, 980 (D.P.R. 1968).
No, it is not the re-entry that I wish to highlight, but the deportation aspect. I did write, quite extensively, about this at The Kitchen, but our government does not have the same attitude to its citizens' protection as that of the USA's.
Not only did it sign up to a grossly unfair and one-sided treaty with our American cousins, but our state also signed up to the increasingly infamous European Arrest Warrant. In respect of that, Dan Hannan once again highlights the case of Andrew Symeou.
You would have no such consolation in the case of Andrew Symeou, a young man from Enfield who has lost three years of his life because of what looks like a straightforward case of mistaken identity. Andrew is in Greece, still waiting for his trial on manslaughter charges, although the only evidence against him rests on suspiciously worded witness statements which have since been retracted or contradicted.
And he is far from being the only one.
Our government is failing, and has failed for some time, to fulfil its primary (and only worthwhile) role—to protect British citizens. Our MPs signed away that power—in favour, it sometimes seems, of just about any arbitrary justice system in the world.
The European Arrest Warrant a fucking travesty which we should remove ourselves from at the first fucking opportunity. Unfortunately, that is not going to happen under the
Leaving aside the fact that she is obviously a fucking traitor, why did Theresa May decide to sign up away yet more of our rights? It is unclear.
So, admirable trouble-maker Douglas Carswell MP has decided to ask her directly.
'm genuinely curious as to why Theresa May, Home Secretary, signed us up to the European Investigation Order. She didn't have to. She could easily have said no. But she chose to make British police forces subject to them.
I've tabled some Parliamentary questions to ask her to publish the advice she received before she made her decision, as her statement to the Commons still leaves me a little curious.
Perhaps it was because senior officials in her department wanted it - in which case we should be told. Maybe it was because ACPO - the Association of Chief Police Officers - wanted it? But if we did all that that ACPO asks, we'd probably be wearing compulsory ID tags. I'll keep you posted when I get those answers...
Now, since I am pretty sure that Theresa's reply will not include the words "because I'm a disgusting, hypocritical, lying traitor who couldn't give two shits about the British people whom I am supposed to represent", we shall simply have to see what her answer is.
But I shall tell you this now—no excuse is going to be good enough.
It's time to start sharpening the cockroaches again...