Rioting at Campsfield concentration camp

[denniseagle]

More clueless shite. FYI, the majority of asylum refusals aren't made on the basis that the Home office suspects an applicant's from a country other than the one claimed: very very few people aren't able to demonstrate precisely where they're from, notwithstanding the inaccuracy of the HO's own Country Guidance information.

The majority of refusals I see- and trust me, I see a lot- are made on the basis of such nonsense as: 'The Secretary of State believes that you have entered into a homosexual relationship in the UK (for 2 years!) purely to bolster your claim to be a homosexual and, consequently, at risk of persecution in Iran' or 'The Secretary of State considers that you have inflicted the burn marks on yourself purely to bolster your claim to have been a victim of torture' (this to a guy with severe scarring on his arse).

It's a fucking obscenity.

About 3 years ago someone I knew was killed in a car crash.

The crash was caused by a person driving without a licence, without insurance ,with under inflated tyres, in a vehicle that would have failed an MOT test.
All facts brought up when the driver was sentenced in court.

The person driving the car was a failed asylum seeker who entered the country without documentation and claimed to be fleeing persecution from one country but in fact came from another.

The person who died was a happily married 42 year old father of 3 and driving completely normally on his way to work.

The guy who caused the crash is no longer incarcerated.....................

 

[denniseagle]

Hard labour regime.

Erm, their country of origin. If they provide the right country, presumably someone will have some record of their existence, and if not, someone who knows them and can vouch for them. If Pigeon is right this isn't a major problem.

Builders, who normally build accomodation. Odd question.

Watch me not give a toss. Not many votes in violating another country's sovereignty and launching an aggressive war, but that never stopped them. They're government, they're supposed to govern, which means they're supposed to deal with unpopular but necessary matters like this effectively.

Those Victorians didn't have many votes sorting out the dilapidated prison system but they got on with it. If this lot can't, why don't they do us all a favour and sod off.

I offered some solutions, or at least, solutions beyond "lock 'em up!". And while criminal suspects might skip bail/fail to report, it's still considered appropriate for them. I see no reason why asylum seekers should expect worse treatment than a robbery suspect.

Country of origin?
My point exactly which is their country of origin?
Who is this someone who can vouch for them??
Someone travels from say DRC to the UK with the intention of claiming asylum from Rwanda. They are hardly likely to have anyone who can vouch for them from DRC and those that could vouch for them from Rwanda wont be coming forward will they?
So tell me precisely how anyone discovers where they come from?
And any idea as to the timescale involved?
Where do they reside ,taking into account the possibility of them disappearing , during this time?


Hardly an odd question only someone who is pedantic might think so.
Let me put it another way just so you can understand.
Builders like to be paid for building things, care to elaborate as to who precisely will be paying them to build the accomodation you require??


Its not you who doesn't give a toss that your local MP is worried about.
Try asking all your neighbours if they want to have some form of unsecure accomodation in your street for potential illegal immigrants or asylum seekers,not too sure that very many would have your outlook, especially if they have to pay for it.
And they are the people who MP's do have sleepless nights over.


Care to check out who did had the 'vote' during the Victorian era?
Not very many and those that did were often told who to vote for so your statement is completely meaningless.
Most 'public' works undertaken during the Victorian era were either buildings with which to leave a legacy or done by the greater glory of God squad.

Your 'solutions ' dont add up to much really do they.

 

[denniseagle]

Hard labour regime.

Erm, their country of origin. If they provide the right country, presumably someone will have some record of their existence, and if not, someone who knows them and can vouch for them. If Pigeon is right this isn't a major problem.

Builders, who normally build accomodation. Odd question.

Watch me not give a toss. Not many votes in violating another country's sovereignty and launching an aggressive war, but that never stopped them. They're government, they're supposed to govern, which means they're supposed to deal with unpopular but necessary matters like this effectively.

Those Victorians didn't have many votes sorting out the dilapidated prison system but they got on with it. If this lot can't, why don't they do us all a favour and sod off.

I offered some solutions, or at least, solutions beyond "lock 'em up!". And while criminal suspects might skip bail/fail to report, it's still considered appropriate for them. I see no reason why asylum seekers should expect worse treatment than a robbery suspect.

Country of origin?
My point exactly which is their country of origin?
Who is this someone who can vouch for them??
Someone travels from say DRC to the UK with the intention of claiming asylum from Rwanda. They are hardly likely to have anyone who can vouch for them from Rwanda and those that could vouch for them from DRC wont be coming forward will they?
So tell me precisely how anyone discovers where they come from?
And any idea as to the timescale involved?
Where do they reside ,taking into account the possibility of them disappearing , during this time?


Hardly an odd question only someone who is pedantic might think so.
Let me put it another way just so you can understand.
Builders like to be paid for building things, care to elaborate as to who precisely will be paying them to build the accomodation you require??


Its not you who doesn't give a toss that your local MP is worried about.
Try asking all your neighbours if they want to have some form of unsecure accomodation in your street for potential illegal immigrants or asylum seekers,not too sure that very many would have your outlook, especially if they have to pay for it.
And they are the people who MP's do have sleepless nights over.


Care to check out who did had the 'vote' during the Victorian era?
Not very many and those that did were often told who to vote for so your statement is completely meaningless.
Most 'public' works undertaken during the Victorian era were either buildings with which to leave a legacy or done by the greater glory of God squad.

Your 'solutions ' dont add up to much really do they.

 

[denniseagle]

please ignore first posting in reply to Azrael

sorry had to edit first post and double posted by mistake

 

[Loki]

from http://www.guardian.co.uk/immigration/story/0,,2033734,00.html

What a disgrace.

The US-owned company GEO began a three-year contract to run the centre in September last year.

Hmm...

 

[Azrael]

Care to check out who did had the 'vote' during the Victorian era?
Not very many and those that did were often told who to vote for so your statement is completely meaningless.

Most 'public' works undertaken during the Victorian era were either buildings with which to leave a legacy or done by the greater glory of God squad.

And they continued to listen after the Ballot Act 1872?

I'm well aware of the several Victorian franchise arrangements, thank you. What have they got to do with anything? (And you do know politicians weren't just influenced by who had the vote? No, clearly not.)

I fail to see what ego-buildings had to do with sorting out the prisons.

Your 'solutions ' dont add up to much really do they.

Perhaps, perhaps not, but they add up to a damn sight more than your string of apathetic nimbyism. If people are cacking themselves about hoards of "illegals" (nice lumping together there) then perhaps the government had best stop whipping up fear and start confronting those attitudes with argument and example.

I note your utterly pointless excursion into your encounter with an evil asylum seeker. If that's going to be the level of this "debate" then I think others, with higher bullshit tolerance, are best suited to addressing it.

 

[Kaka Tim]

About 3 years ago someone I knew was killed in a car crash.

The crash was caused by a person driving without a licence, without insurance ,with under inflated tyres, in a vehicle that would have failed an MOT test.
All facts brought up when the driver was sentenced in court.

The person driving the car was a failed asylum seeker who entered the country without documentation and claimed to be fleeing persecution from one country but in fact came from another.

The person who died was a happily married 42 year old father of 3 and driving completely normally on his way to work.

The guy who caused the crash is no longer incarcerated.....................

Right - the person is guilty of casuing death by dangerous driving and driving without insurence etc. I'm struggling to see how this relates to the the argument over asylum and immigration. Would you be arguing to repeal the act of union if the driver had been scottish?

The story also bares a remarkable similarity to an article in the Sun about six weeks ago. Are you sure you actually know this person? Or is is manufactured self -righteousness designed to make an emotive - but utterly spurious - argument?

The bottom line is - this is the fourth richest coutnry in the world and we have a morla obligastion to treat our fellow human beings with dignity, respect and respect their basic human rights. Yes the influx of significent numbers of refugees casues problems - but the problem are rooted in the fact that they are housed in the poorest parts of the country where public services are already stretched and no work is done to address the concerns of the local population - so the issue is one of resources. The UK can easily affordf more social housing and schools and healthcare (think of the squllions spent on invading Iraq and replacingTrident).

But these resource problesm are being used as an excuse for the xenophobes and rascists to create a spectre of legions of scrounging, law breaking darkies coming over here to turn us into mad islamics and dilute 'our bristihness'.

As it happens I live in social housing in an area where large numbers of refugees have been housed. And in two years of living here Iv'e yet to see that they have directly casued any problems. Gerneally they want to get on with their lives and not cause any problems (which is logical self interest after all). TBH the demographic changes they have brought about have improved the area - there is less crime, less anti-social behaviour and less drug dealing. People ar enot going to uproot themselves from everything they know, travel at great expense accross half the globe only to lunch it out on benefits are they?

 

[Mr Smin]

Well said, Kaka Tim.

But I am concerned about all these economic migrants from the north of england coming to steal jobs which should by rights belong to southerners. </flippant>

 

[ViolentPanda]

For all the reports of racism and animosity, it was interesting that the 2 detainees I treated at the scene were on first name terms with even the local riot squad and vice versa. Not saying the reports are false but the place is not entirely dehumanised.

I wasn't aware, even with some of the florid rhetoric on this thread, that anyone had claimed the place was "entirely dehumanised".
I know from experience that unfortunately you only need maybe 5-10% of the staff to "have beef" with detainees of any sort for the establishment to become dangerously unstable.

By "local riot squad", I presume you're referring to the HM Prison Service and police personnel that get drafted in to clear up the shit whenever a private establishment erupts?

 

[denniseagle]

Right - the person is guilty of casuing death by dangerous driving and driving without insurence etc. I'm struggling to see how this relates to the the argument over asylum and immigration. Would you be arguing to repeal the act of union if the driver had been scottish?

The story also bares a remarkable similarity to an article in the Sun about six weeks ago. Are you sure you actually know this person? Or is is manufactured self -righteousness designed to make an emotive - but utterly spurious - argument?

The bottom line is - this is the fourth richest coutnry in the world and we have a morla obligastion to treat our fellow human beings with dignity, respect and respect their basic human rights. Yes the influx of significent numbers of refugees casues problems - but the problem are rooted in the fact that they are housed in the poorest parts of the country where public services are already stretched and no work is done to address the concerns of the local population - so the issue is one of resources. The UK can easily affordf more social housing and schools and healthcare (think of the squllions spent on invading Iraq and replacingTrident).

But these resource problesm are being used as an excuse for the xenophobes and rascists to create a spectre of legions of scrounging, law breaking darkies coming over here to turn us into mad islamics and dilute 'our bristihness'.

As it happens I live in social housing in an area where large numbers of refugees have been housed. And in two years of living here Iv'e yet to see that they have directly casued any problems. Gerneally they want to get on with their lives and not cause any problems (which is logical self interest after all). TBH the demographic changes they have brought about have improved the area - there is less crime, less anti-social behaviour and less drug dealing. People ar enot going to uproot themselves from everything they know, travel at great expense accross half the globe only to lunch it out on benefits are they?

Paul Fritchley born and lived in Gloucester (actually next door to me during my school years.)died due to an illegal immigrant/asylum seeker who had no right to actually be in the UK when he caused the accident. All facts confirmed in court if you care to check.
Care to call me a liar rather than insinuate????????

 

[denniseagle]

And they continued to listen after the Ballot Act 1872?

I'm well aware of the several Victorian franchise arrangements, thank you. What have they got to do with anything? (And you do know politicians weren't just influenced by who had the vote? No, clearly not.)

I fail to see what ego-buildings had to do with sorting out the prisons.

Perhaps, perhaps not, but they add up to a damn sight more than your string of apathetic nimbyism. If people are cacking themselves about hoards of "illegals" (nice lumping together there) then perhaps the government had best stop whipping up fear and start confronting those attitudes with argument and example.

I note your utterly pointless excursion into your encounter with an evil asylum seeker. If that's going to be the level of this "debate" then I think others, with higher bullshit tolerance, are best suited to addressing it.

I'm sure Mrs Pankhurst was happy with the ballot act of 1872
You brought up the victorian era and their massive investment in prisons etc . I just pointed out the reality of reasons behind all their 'good works'
Wasn't lumping anything together, just pointing out the reality , something you fail to address. If someone claims asylum and fails, they are in effect illegal immigrants if they refuse to leave the country.
Name me a politician who doesn't have one eye on those who vote for them.

Not apathetic just pointing out the reality of life.
Where I live there is a massive campaign against siting a bail hostel in a residential street near 3 schools.
The people who would be placed in the Hostel are people who the authorities know everything about due to the fact the have been through the courts and been convicted.
With those who are claiming asylum, until their identity has been confirmed no one knows who or more importantly what they are.
Want a paedophile living next door to you?
How about a serial rapist?
Need I go on?

 

[Kaka Tim]

Paul Fritchley born and lived in Gloucester (actually next door to me during my school years.)died due to an illegal immigrant/asylum seeker who had no right to actually be in the UK when he caused the accident. All facts confirmed in court if you care to check.
Care to call me a liar rather than insinuate????????

I was making sure you actually knew this person rather than regurgitating lurid scare stories about evil asylum seekers that do the rounds. Ive heard hundreds of them. ('refugees get vouchers for free cars/ they get free mobile phones, they automatically get a council house, the police cant arrest them' etc - all shite)

Now what has the fact that an individual person behaved with criminal irresponsibly got to do with wider debate about refugees?

Unless you are suggesting that people who come into this country as refugees are significantly more likely to behave in this manner than all your doing is using a tragic incident to make a spurious, but emotive, point.

I could easily come back with a list of refugee I know who contribute greatly to the well being of their local community or are generally just lovely human beings.

It would be equally spurious.

They're people.

Some of them are gold. Some of them are cunts. Most are inbetween. Just like people the world over wherever they come from.

The bottom line is that I believe that they should be treated as human beings and afforded the same basic rights as everyone else. Thats what 'inalienable' means.

You seem to think that human rights should only be granted to people you approve of and withdrawn from those you dont.

Thats why I think incarcerating people simply becasue they are politically a bit embarassing (i.e. 'we need to get tough on refugees so as not to loose the votes of the xenohphobes and rascists' ) is utterly unaceptable and unjustified.

 

[Kaka Tim]

With those who are claiming asylum, until their identity has been confirmed no one knows who or more importantly what they are.
Want a paedophile living next door to you?
How about a serial rapist?
Need I go on?

Are they more likely to be nonces and rapists then? (you do like these spurious emotive arguments dont you?)
If anyhting, people who are claiming refugee status or are under threat of deportation are surely less likely to do anyhting that jepodises their stay here.
And nonces and rapists are not banned from living anywhere - so they could be living next to you already. Perhaps using their special nonce gloves to sniff children on the internet .... etc

I live in a tower block with 1 and 2 bed flats. As this is not classed as familiy housing it highly likely there's some people housed here who are on the sex offenders list. There's also a large number of people from refugee backgrounds. My daughter stays with me other week. I am not concerned for her safety as I am not planning on leaving her ino the care of people I dont know. But now you mention it - mayber those congolese guys next door are planning to break into my flat in the dead of night - off to the camp with them! - cos you cant be too careful.

And people who have their claim refused are not 'illegal immigrants' they are put on the list for deportation. What are they supposed to to do in the meantime? Walk back to Zimbabwe or Afghanistan?
Many people dont get deported because it is expensive -so they are left in limbo with no benefits and baneed form working. In some cases - such as Iraqis, they're is no safe passage back tio their home country so they are just left indefinitely. None of this is the fault of the people in this situation. They dont come over here for a bit of fun - they are generally deperate people trying to get on with their lives.

 

[Mr Smin]

I wasn't aware, even with some of the florid rhetoric on this thread, that anyone had claimed the place was "entirely dehumanised".
I know from experience that unfortunately you only need maybe 5-10% of the staff to "have beef" with detainees of any sort for the establishment to become dangerously unstable.

By "local riot squad", I presume you're referring to the HM Prison Service and police personnel that get drafted in to clear up the shit whenever a private establishment erupts?

'entirely dehumanised' - i was saying that in isolation - twas perhaps hyperbole.
by 'local riot squad' i specifically meant the exact opposite of what you said - the private firm staff who were there from the beginning. I make no comment about the HMP and police squads - it would be astonishing if they knew the names of detainees in a place they didn't normally work.

 

[ViolentPanda]

'entirely dehumanised' - i was saying that in isolation - twas perhaps hyperbole.

Mmmm, perhaps it was.

by 'local riot squad' i specifically meant the exact opposite of what you said - the private firm staff who were there from the beginning. I make no comment about the HMP and police squads - it would be astonishing if they knew the names of detainees in a place they didn't normally work.

Ah. It's just that "riot squads"/pacification squads/clearance squads (i.e. the bussed in people who have to go in and take the flak after a private establishment has its' inmates go apeshit) are never made up of the staff of the private establishments because a) they don't have the training, and b) their employers begrudge paying the indemnity fees for their staff to receive and use said training.

I'm not a fan of private penal establishments. They're expensive, the staff (with a few shining exceptions) are under-trained for the job, and I saw more assault complaints laid against staff originating from 5 private establishments in my region than from 20 higher category HM Prison Service establishments. Perhaps Campsfield is one of the exceptions to the poor record of UK private penal establishments. Information from personal contacts (and what gets into the media) says otherwise.

Bear in mind that you don't need an establishment to be "rotten to the core" for it to become a place where inmates live in fear, you only need a few staff on each duty on each shift to fuck the atmosphere of the entire establishment up. It's entirely possible to have pleasant staff who know the names of detainees in the same establishment and even on the same shift as diehard racists and aggro merchants. G-d knows the Prison Service has had the same problem for the last 50 years, probably longer.

 

[Mr Smin]

VP, we seem to hold much the same point of view.
I probably should have said 'local staff in body armor' rather than 'local riot squads' in my initial post since the latter does imply some specialism.

I had originally posted my direct experience - I'm probably the only poster on this thread who was there on the day and I tried to keep it factual. To add my opinion, it has been reported in the meeja that GEO (the firm running Campsfield) is the same firm that has the Guantanamo contract - if true, it's just wrong in so many ways.

 

[Luther Blissett]

meeja=media?

 

[Fruitloop]

Yep.

 

[Pigeon]

About 3 years ago someone I knew was killed in a car crash.

The crash was caused by a person driving without a licence, without insurance ,with under inflated tyres, in a vehicle that would have failed an MOT test.
All facts brought up when the driver was sentenced in court.

The person driving the car was a failed asylum seeker who entered the country without documentation and claimed to be fleeing persecution from one country but in fact came from another.

The person who died was a happily married 42 year old father of 3 and driving completely normally on his way to work.

The guy who caused the crash is no longer incarcerated.....................

So you're in favour of harsher sentences for dangerous drivers. Why conflate immigration status with that?

 

[Pigeon]

Country of origin?
My point exactly which is their country of origin?
Who is this someone who can vouch for them??
Someone travels from say DRC to the UK with the intention of claiming asylum from Rwanda. They are hardly likely to have anyone who can vouch for them from DRC and those that could vouch for them from Rwanda wont be coming forward will they?
So tell me precisely how anyone discovers where they come from?
And any idea as to the timescale involved?
Where do they reside ,taking into account the possibility of them disappearing , during this time?

More hypothetical garbage.

 

[denniseagle]

Right - the person is guilty of casuing death by dangerous driving and driving without insurence etc. I'm struggling to see how this relates to the the argument over asylum and immigration. Would you be arguing to repeal the act of union if the driver had been scottish?

The story also bares a remarkable similarity to an article in the Sun about six weeks ago. Are you sure you actually know this person? Or is is manufactured self -righteousness designed to make an emotive - but utterly spurious - argument?

The bottom line is - this is the fourth richest coutnry in the world and we have a morla obligastion to treat our fellow human beings with dignity, respect and respect their basic human rights. Yes the influx of significent numbers of refugees casues problems - but the problem are rooted in the fact that they are housed in the poorest parts of the country where public services are already stretched and no work is done to address the concerns of the local population - so the issue is one of resources. The UK can easily affordf more social housing and schools and healthcare (think of the squllions spent on invading Iraq and replacingTrident).

But these resource problesm are being used as an excuse for the xenophobes and rascists to create a spectre of legions of scrounging, law breaking darkies coming over here to turn us into mad islamics and dilute 'our bristihness'.

As it happens I live in social housing in an area where large numbers of refugees have been housed. And in two years of living here Iv'e yet to see that they have directly casued any problems. Gerneally they want to get on with their lives and not cause any problems (which is logical self interest after all). TBH the demographic changes they have brought about have improved the area - there is less crime, less anti-social behaviour and less drug dealing. People ar enot going to uproot themselves from everything they know, travel at great expense accross half the globe only to lunch it out on benefits are they?[/Q

They guy had no right to be in this country.
He had entered illegally.
Under such circumstances it doesn't matter one jot how morally obliged you believe this country to be.
The guy had broken the law
He had failed in his attempt at hiding as an illegal immigrant which was when he claimed asylum.
His application was unsucessful due to the facts of he wasn't who he said he was, nor from where he said he had come from.
He then apparently got 'lost' amongst the large numbers of unplaced people/illegal immigrants/asylum seekers , call them what you will.
He next came to the attention of the authorities the day he killed Paul.
Now you can argue that the fault lies with the authorities not making sure he was deported, and I agree to some extent.
The problem was, he was not placed in a secure accomodation facility after his asylum claim was rejected, and prior to his deportation.
Now this thread started about Campsfield and the riot that occured there. Some posted on here stating that asylum seekers should not be in secure accomodation, I disagreed and posted my reason for thinking the way I do.

Now where have I stated or even hinted at a desire for the act of union to be abolished??
Spurious comment on your part perhaps??

Now perhaps in the utopian housing estate where you live, crime is non existant, its certainly far from crime free where I live.
But again where did I state that crime was the fault of illegal immigrants or asylum seekers?
Or to use your words 'legions of scrounging law breaking darkies...........................'

Think you have been reading the Mail and Express too often.
Not everyone who disagrees with you should be accused of lying or of being a rascist.
Certainly without having the faintest clue as to what colour my skin is.....................

 

[denniseagle]

Are they more likely to be nonces and rapists then? (you do like these spurious emotive arguments dont you?)
If anyhting, people who are claiming refugee status or are under threat of deportation are surely less likely to do anyhting that jepodises their stay here.
And nonces and rapists are not banned from living anywhere - so they could be living next to you already. Perhaps using their special nonce gloves to sniff children on the internet .... etc

I live in a tower block with 1 and 2 bed flats. As this is not classed as familiy housing it highly likely there's some people housed here who are on the sex offenders list. There's also a large number of people from refugee backgrounds. My daughter stays with me other week. I am not concerned for her safety as I am not planning on leaving her ino the care of people I dont know. But now you mention it - mayber those congolese guys next door are planning to break into my flat in the dead of night - off to the camp with them! - cos you cant be too careful.

And people who have their claim refused are not 'illegal immigrants' they are put on the list for deportation. What are they supposed to to do in the meantime? Walk back to Zimbabwe or Afghanistan?
Many people dont get deported because it is expensive -so they are left in limbo with no benefits and baneed form working. In some cases - such as Iraqis, they're is no safe passage back tio their home country so they are just left indefinitely. None of this is the fault of the people in this situation. They dont come over here for a bit of fun - they are generally deperate people trying to get on with their lives.

I have no idea what so ever as to what the likelyhood is as to whether they are nonces or rapists.
Nether do you.
The bail hostel I refered to, will however, be 'catering' for some people convicted of sexual crimes.
People whose identity and 'history' is known to the authorities.
My point was, those who see no problems with unsecured accomodation for people whose identity, nationality, or entitlement to reside in this country have yet to be established, should perhaps ponder on the possiblity of nonces and rapists being present.
Not a spurious argument at all, emotive yes I grant you.

The guy who killed Paul didn't seem to be too concerned as to what laws he broke.
Even to the extent that he was also on his way to work at the time.
And before you ask, I'm not sure as to what, if anything, happened to the company he was working for .
Then again I supose he must have be the exception.

As to whether they should walk back to Zimbabwe or Afghanistan... why not?
They made it through countless other countries to reach these shores under their own steam and financed the journey themselves.
Is it beyond their abilities to do the same in reverse?
Or better still present themselves at the British Embassy in their native countries, and apply for asylum there.

 

[denniseagle]

More clueless shite. FYI, the majority of asylum refusals aren't made on the basis that the Home office suspects an applicant's from a country other than the one claimed: very very few people aren't able to demonstrate precisely where they're from, notwithstanding the inaccuracy of the HO's own Country Guidance information.

The majority of refusals I see- and trust me, I see a lot- are made on the basis of such nonsense as: 'The Secretary of State believes that you have entered into a homosexual relationship in the UK (for 2 years!) purely to bolster your claim to be a homosexual and, consequently, at risk of persecution in Iran' or 'The Secretary of State considers that you have inflicted the burn marks on yourself purely to bolster your claim to have been a victim of torture' (this to a guy with severe scarring on his arse).

It's a fucking obscenity.

Let me get this straight then.

If I say I'm claiming asylum and I come from Rwanda, when in fact I come from DRC , that all the details I give you are false, that alone would not disbar me from having my claim for asylum accepted?

 

[Pigeon]

Let me get this straight then.

If I say I'm claiming asylum and I come from Rwanda, when in fact I come from DRC , that all the details I give you are false, that alone would not disbar me from having my claim for asylum accepted?

If my granny had balls she'd be my grandad.

What I'm telling you is that the majority of people refused asylum in this country are able to prove quite categorically where they're from. So you're debating on a false premise.

And no: I don't think that anyone who does give false information in the way you describe should be automatically disbarred from anything, particularly in the example you're giving.

Refused asylum seekers returned to the DRC are routinely arrested, imprisoned, beaten and tortured. I would do all I could to prevent that from happening to me. So, I suspect, would you.

 

[Mr Smin]

Or better still present themselves at the British Embassy in their native countries, and apply for asylum there.

Which award are you after, best dry humor or most naive?

 

[ViolentPanda]

Which award are you after, best dry humor or most naive?

Got to be "most naive", hasn't it?

He probably doesn't realise quite how closely foreign embassies are watched in just about every host country, or that, say, Zimbabwean citizens going into the British embassy in harare are likely to have their soft bits kicked by the security services until they disclose why they went there.

 

[denniseagle]

Got to be "most naive", hasn't it?

He probably doesn't realise quite how closely foreign embassies are watched in just about every host country, or that, say, Zimbabwean citizens going into the British embassy in harare are likely to have their soft bits kicked by the security services until they disclose why they went there.

And there are no British embassies in neighbouring countries?
Obviously they must all take the direct flight from Harare to Heathrow, bypassing all Uncle Bob's goons in the process (do not pass Go do not collect £200.)
No one ever slips across the border into Botswana, Zambia, Mozambique, orSouth Africa on the first stage of their 'journey' do they.

 

[urbanrevolt]

Actually they do. Iran has about a million and a half refugees, Pakistan about a million, there are around 2 million internally displaced people in Sudan, 100 000s just over the border.

There is absolutely no chance of getting asylum at a British embassy. I knew a man from Ethiopia who was beaten by the police and told he would be arrested and tortured if he didn't give up the names of people in his organisation- a peaceful organisation campaigning for democracy.

He partly through naivety and certainly desperation applied for sanction at the British embassy. He was refused instantly. Some manage to escape over the border to Kenya or Sudan- very difficult and treacheropus country where there is low scale civil war.

Immigration controls here are all about dividing the workking class and creating a pool of cheap and desperate labour. We should be for working class unity, for trade unions to organise and campaign for immigrant workers and communities and for the self-organisation of migrants

 

[ViolentPanda]

And there are no British embassies in neighbouring countries?
Obviously they must all take the direct flight from Harare to Heathrow, bypassing all Uncle Bob's goons in the process (do not pass Go do not collect £200.)
No one ever slips across the border into Botswana, Zambia, Mozambique, orSouth Africa on the first stage of their 'journey' do they.

Have I claimed that any of the above doesn't occur?

Anyway, lets have a go at some of your specific points, shall we?

An embassy in a neighbouring country is going to have just a little trouble issuing an entry visa to a citizen of another country.

The embassies are in Harare, which airport the person departs from is immaterial.

people may well "slip across the border", but by doing so they have to get past "uncle Bob's" army, and the border patrols of their neighbouring states, whose economies are being strained by hundreds of thousands of Zimbabwean refugees.

Life isn't as simple as you appear to believe it is. If it was we'd all be happy fucking bunnies, wouldn't we?

 

[Kaka Tim]

And also to cliam asylum from persucution is a fundemental right enshrined in the UN declaration of human rights (1948?) - to which britian is a signatory . Therefore there is no such thing as an 'illegal' ayslum seeker.

The refugess who turn up in britain are the ones who have scraped the means together to get here - selfishly and evilly choosing not to sit indifeinitely in the chaming disease ridden, filthy, ill supplied and overcrowded refugee camps in their neighbouring countries.

What pisses me off about the like of denniseagle - apart form his attmepts to assoiciate refugees with rape, child abuse and bad driving - is the lengths he will go to in order to avoid giving the a shit for the most vunerable and shat upon group of people in the country.

Lock em up- send em home. etc etc.

Tis the mantra of the bona fide willfully ignorant cunt.