Calais: Migration and the UK Border

[ViolentPanda]

One thing i will say in this thread (and i know it wont go down well), is that if anyone thinks all asylum claims are genuine, you are very much mistaken.

Of course they're not all genuine!
That doesn't excuse the pisspoor job the wankers at the UK Border Agency/UK Immigration & Visas do, the high rate of their (supposedly-informed) decisions overturned on appeal, or the fact that the service is still chock-full of institutional racism.

 

[sovereignb]

No but the system needs to be ALOT tighter, and it can be. If you trust the systems good enough to grant asylum to some, then surely it needs to deal appropriately with the ones refused, no? Many end up working illegally, turning to crime and living in hell holes (its unlikely they would be able to claim benefits). But it seems somewhat pointless having the system (which is increasingly bogged down by more applicants) if most end up staying anyway.
The Home Office have revolving door battle on their hands.

Bear in mind, as my previous post, i'm mainly talking about the "minors" I have engage with. Many are far from being minors (though they claim they are) and are placed in the care of Social Services. That way, they are entitled to financial and accommodation support, along those with minors already in the UK care system. Some do very well, settling into studies. Others are robbing within weeks (because YES that happens), in and out of prison for all matter of things. Some actually do have family and friends here, yet continue to use the support of social services. And organised crime is a VERY big thing from certain countries. Yet most have ultimately come "for a better life", as opposed to being in fear of their lives back home.

The UK is still ignorantly seen by many as the land paved with gold. Ultimately, is the UK supposed to absorb all the issues? Is it a question of, well we're are one of the richest countries, so we should?

 

[sovereignb]

Of course they're not all genuine!
That doesn't excuse the pisspoor job the wankers at the UK Border Agency/UK Immigration & Visas do, the high rate of their (supposedly-informed) decisions overturned on appeal, or the fact that the service is still chock-full of institutional racism.

But many ARE being granted asylum appeals too, and we are saying thats good. In fact, in my experience, after time, the majority do win. So the ones being refused, well it must be down rascist immigration officers?

 

[ViolentPanda]

But many ARE being granted asylum appeals too, and we are saying thats good. In fact, in my experience, after time, the majority do win. So the ones being refused, well it must be down rascist immigration officers?

Please don't put words in my mouth,especially when you clearly don't understand the term "institutional racism" (hint: It isn't about personnel ).
As for bigging up people succeeding after appeal, wouldn't it be better, more efficient, to actually do the fucking job properly the first time round, so that so many appeals (costly and time-intensive as they are) weren't necessary in the first place?

 

[ViolentPanda]

Bear in mind, as my previous post, i'm mainly talking about the "minors" I have engage with. Many are far from being minors (though they claim they are) and are placed in the care of Social Services.

I recall doing some research a couple of years ago into the Home Office's methods of determining age. None of the methods were accurate, they all (bone length, fusion of skull sutures, genital development etc) had a +/- of about 3 years). There's been talk about dating of telomeres in DNA samples, but that's currently prohibitively expensive compared to getting a physician to say "he/she's over 18".

 

[bluescreen]

This is a bit random and irrelevant but I don't understand why the UK is allegedy regarded as so wonderful rather than, say, France. Is it just the language thing? There must be something going on that makes migrants prefer to make the break for England rather than settling in France. Or indeed, Italy, where they often land. We treat our immigrants so badly - can it really be better than others?

 

[sovereignb]

Please don't put words in my mouth,especially when you clearly don't understand the term "institutional racism" (hint: It isn't about personnel ).
As for bigging up people succeeding after appeal, wouldn't it be better, more efficient, to actually do the fucking job properly the first time round, so that so many appeals (costly and time-intensive as they are) weren't necessary in the first place?

Lets not get so defensive. I'm more than aware of what institutional racism is. And that same racism is there when people are given leave to remain on their first application.

From my experience, Home Office investigations of asylum claims are quite thorough. No applicant is going to just walk after being refused once.
They have the opportunity to appeal several times. The Home Office still maintain that it is safe for an applicant to go home. The eventual decision to give a few years leave to remain is usually given by the High Courts, mainly on the basis of family life or health grounds. They then start the process again when those years of leave to remain expire.

I recall doing some research a couple of years ago into the Home Office's methods of determining age. None of the methods were accurate, they all (bone length, fusion of skull sutures, genital development etc) had a +/- of about 3 years). There's been talk about dating of telomeres in DNA samples, but that's currently prohibitively expensive compared to getting a physician to say "he/she's over 18".

Its ongoing problem. I think its very unfair for adults to be placed with children in homes & foster carers.

 

[sovereignb]

This is a bit random and irrelevant but I don't understand why the UK is allegedy regarded as so wonderful rather than, say, France. Is it just the language thing? There must be something going on that makes migrants prefer to make the break for England rather than settling in France. Or indeed, Italy, where they often land. We treat our immigrants so badly - can it really be better than others?

I think we treat are asylum seekers much better than France, Italy and Australia. However, alot is based on myth, like being able to "get a house" Most think there are better job opportunities and access to education.

 

[phildwyer]

I recall doing some research

Here's some research I did about you: you're a coward who attacks people when you know they can't answer back. What fun can you possibly derive from that? It's despicable.

 

[bluescreen]

Here's some research I did about you: you're a coward who attacks people when you know they can't answer back. What fun can you possibly derive from that? It's despicable.

WTF was that?

 

[ViolentPanda]

WTF was that?

That's phil shitting up this thread because I made some points about him on a thread I later found he was barred from on pain of a banning. He now sees this as an indication of cowardice,despite the fact that I've willingly attacked the self-regarding idiot to his (computerised) face more times than I can recall.
Basically, he's a wanker. I would report the posts (yes, posts!) he's dropped over the boards calling me a coward, because it's classic "cross-thread beef", but I don't report posts,not even from twat-monkeys.

 

[bluescreen]

What is his problem? I thought he was Mr Oxford Don and all.

 

[phildwyer]

it's classic "cross-thread beef"

It's only "cross-thread beef" because I can't respond on the appropriate thread, which is why you shouldn't have brought your own beef to that particular picnic.

 

[bluescreen]

John Agard:

 

[ViolentPanda]

It's only "cross-thread beef" because I can't respond on the appropriate thread, which is why you shouldn't have brought your own beef to that particular picnic.

I'll say it again, because you're a dolt. I wasn't aware of you being threatened with the banhammer until long after responding to those posts,and (as I've posted on the Lidl thread) I respond to threads the way I do,for a reason.Namely (to cite post #1035 of the aforementioned thread):

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, just once, that you're not aware of the fact that I have deteriorating short-term memory (poor enough that it requires medical treatment), and that I respond to threads the way I do because it's the only way I can without losing track.
Strangely, many other regular posters are aware of this, have been for a couple of years and act accordingly.
Now stop shitting up threads with your whining, there's a good boy!

 

[ViolentPanda]

What is his problem? I thought he was Mr Oxford Don and all.

No, Oxford student. Same alma mater as Laurie Penny IIRC.

 

[phildwyer]

I respond to threads the way I do,for a reason.

I wasn't to know that was I?

 

[bluescreen]

No, Oxford student. Same alma mater as Laurie Penny IIRC.

Oh fuck that. I was Oxford student too and have zero respect for anyone who claims it as anything special. Sad sad sad. Isn't he supposed to be a professor something somewhere? Anyway, why are we wasting time on him (sorry, I shouldn't have) when there are serious issues? What can we do to help these people in Calais, and will helping them alleviate the problem and hopefully provide a safety valve for people who are oppressed elsewhere in Europe? Or exacerbate it? We Brits have a serious responsibility here, and we shirk it - though I sometimes wonder if the French are good at facing up to their responsibility too. They have a huge inflow from North Africa, which they are not treating well.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Oh fuck that. I was Oxford student too and have zero respect for anyone who claims it as anything special. Sad sad sad. Isn't he supposed to be a professor something somewhere? Anyway, why are we wasting time on him (sorry, I shouldn't have) when there are serious issues? What can we do to help these people in Calais, and will helping them alleviate the problem and hopefully provide a safety valve for people who are oppressed elsewhere in Europe? Or exacerbate it? We Brits have a serious responsibility here, and we shirk it - though I sometimes wonder if the French are good at facing up to their responsibility too. They have a huge inflow from North Africa, which they are not treating well.

I really despise French "elite" (i.e. the political and economic elite) attitudes to non-white foreigners, especially refugees, economic migrants and asylum-seekers. The British elite attitude is bad enough, what with incarceration, but there's a mild official presumption of a "duty of care", whereas in France it appears to be NGOs, activists and community volunteers taking up all the slack.
Mind you, probably the biggest shit-log in the whole immigration log-pile is the ridiculous "first safe country" policy. By what criteria? Is Greece "safe" for sub-Saharan African blacks? Not judging by the stats on racially-motivated attacks. Is France "safe" for French-speaking North Africans? Seems like the coppers there, like ours, operate on principles derived from the idea that the darker your skin, the more innately-guilty of crime you must be.

 

[SpookyFrank]

No but the system needs to be ALOT tighter, and it can be. If you trust the systems good enough to grant asylum to some, then surely it needs to deal appropriately with the ones refused, no? Many end up working illegally, turning to crime and living in hell holes (its unlikely they would be able to claim benefits). But it seems somewhat pointless having the system (which is increasingly bogged down by more applicants) if most end up staying anyway.

Well then if it's pointless having the system, then why have the system? These people are only 'working illegally' because of a bunch of silly laws which benefit nobody but the bastards who are getting rich by paying poverty wages to people with no other option. If some migrants turn to crime, that is also an inevitable consequence of laws which prevent them from making an honest living.

You can call it 'working illegally' but that's just a cop out. People who are working illegally are doing nothing immoral or harmful, they're just doing what everyone else does to get by. The only difference is that they're doing it while being the wrong sort of person.

The concept of an illegal immigrant is a pretty new one on the grand scheme of things. It is an arbitrary, manufactured category of person. It is heavy with implication and innuendo but has little basis in logic. You don't have to read too many newspapers to see that that a handful of super-wealthy immigrants from Russia or Qatar, or a handful of British people 'domiciled' in foreign lands for tax purposes for that matter, can do more damage to society than however many thousands of ordinary people doing ordinary jobs for sub-ordinary wages possibly could. And yet who is it that we call illegal? The Saudi prince who got his money from a regime that cuts off the heads of dissidents, or the Iraqi dish-washer (former teacher) whose home town was destroyed by Saudi-funded jihadis? I know who I would rather welcome into this country, what about you?

 

[sovereignb]

best stop offering asylum all together then.

Well then if it's pointless having the system, then why have the system? These people are only 'working illegally' because of a bunch of silly laws which benefit nobody but the bastards who are getting rich by paying poverty wages to people with no other option. If some migrants turn to crime, that is also an inevitable consequence of laws which prevent them from making an honest living.

You can call it 'working illegally' but that's just a cop out. People who are working illegally are doing nothing immoral or harmful, they're just doing what everyone else does to get by. The only difference is that they're doing it while being the wrong sort of person.

I agree with this. So id rather there be a system that reflected that and supported those who genuinely want to work /study in the UK
Not the current "im fake fleeing persecution in my country so im coming here to do whatever I want" system. Because that can bring out the dregs of all societies. The crime aspect is not just those who have been refused and aren't able to work. I mentioned in my previous post about some being brought over to be involved in organised crime. Another example, i know of a "young" man who has been here for 4 years, has been to prison 2 times for robbery and continues yet to receive the financial and accommodation support of a local authority. He is far from destitute, yet continues to be involved in offending and only started his "asylum" claim last year.I'm sure to many of you these sound like Daily Mail scaremonger stories, but i'm telling you from my experience, these are not one-offs and there is alot more to it.

So again, is UK society supposed to absorb this? Or do you see matters such as organised crime small issues in the big scheme of things? Not once have I said that someone genuinely fleeing persecution (or the example of the Iraqi teacher you gave) shouldn't be allowed here.

The Powers that be love things the way they are - more money from the blackmarket/illegal workers as well divide and conquer among the people.

 

[DotCommunist]

I don't know why you quoted me you miserable shit but you have the common humanity of a cool original flavoured dorito.

it used to be a matter of pride that we took in the people hounded by torture and inhumanity and risk of immediate death. When did the likes of you get in charge. What happened. We are suposed to be england, we'll take any old bod. Better that than the bod get fingernails pulled out in a sunless cell for organising.

what a cunt you are SB. I've just realised that your username is soveriegnb, as in sovereign borders. On a tiny island with a vast history of population flux, in and out. Go fuck yourself.

 

[eatmorecheese]

I agree with this. So id rather there be a system that reflected that and supported those who genuinely want to work /study in the UK
Not the current "im fake fleeing persecution in my country so im coming here to do whatever I want" system. Because that can bring out the dregs of all societies.

The dregs of society are in charge. You don't have a scooby. Read SpookyFrank 's post again.

 

[SpookyFrank]

The Powers that be love things the way they are - more money from the blackmarket/illegal workers as well divide and conquer among the people.

I'm confused. You say things like what I've quoted above, whilst at the same time cheerleading for the same border controls you're condemning. Our current system of controlling immigration is not fit for purpose on any level you care to name, so the solution to that is an even more extreme version of the same thing? That's utter madness.

As for crime, you talk about people coming to the UK and committing crimes. Like a lot of people in this sort of debate, you forget to mention the fact that plenty of people born in the UK also commit crimes. Some of them even go to foreign countries and commit crimes. Some British people sell arms to dictators, others start illegal wars that create hundreds of thousands of refugees. The behaviour of those people is not an excuse to persecute all British people, and nor is the fact that some immigrants commit crimes an excuse not to treat immigrants with respect and decency.

You say you have no problem with people who are genuinely fleeing persecution being given asylum in the UK. In Calais I met an Afghan man who had worked as a translator for British and US forces. Because of his work, it was no longer safe for him in Afghanistan. His situation is far from unique. Maybe if he applied for asylum in the UK he would be successful, provided he had plenty of documentary evidence, but he couldn't even travel to the UK to make his claim. As I'm sure you know, if your feet aren't on British soil you cannot claim asylum in the UK. It's meaningless to say that we support anyone who has a genuine claim for asylum when we don't even provide those people with a safe, legal means of getting here in the first place.

 

[SpookyFrank]

I recall doing some research a couple of years ago into the Home Office's methods of determining age. None of the methods were accurate, they all (bone length, fusion of skull sutures, genital development etc) had a +/- of about 3 years). There's been talk about dating of telomeres in DNA samples, but that's currently prohibitively expensive compared to getting a physician to say "he/she's over 18".

All that measuring of bones and stuff seems so backward I didn't believe it when I was first told about it.

But I suppose, until we find some way to communicate with people and simply ask them how old they are, it will just have to do.

 

[ViolentPanda]

All that measuring of bones and stuff seems so backward I didn't believe it when I was first told about it.

It's so amazingly crude, as well as being environmentally-dependent, that it's not really worth bothering with. Even regarding puberty, malnutrition can either advance or retard development.

But I suppose, until we find some way to communicate with people and simply ask them how old they are, it will just have to do.

Unfortunately, as we both know, there isn't the degree of trust on the part of the Home Office (or rather, on the part of the ministers) to take the word of refugees.

 

[ViolentPanda]

I agree with this. So id rather there be a system that reflected that and supported those who genuinely want to work /study in the UK.

AKA "immigrants with money".

Not the current "im fake fleeing persecution in my country so im coming here to do whatever I want" system. Because that can bring out the dregs of all societies.

because, of course, we don't already have "dregs of society" here, governing us, patrolling our streets, running financial institutions...

The crime aspect is not just those who have been refused and aren't able to work. I mentioned in my previous post about some being brought over to be involved in organised crime. Another example, i know of a "young" man who has been here for 4 years, has been to prison 2 times for robbery and continues yet to receive the financial and accommodation support of a local authority. He is far from destitute, yet continues to be involved in offending and only started his "asylum" claim last year.I'm sure to many of you these sound like Daily Mail scaremonger stories, but i'm telling you from my experience, these are not one-offs and there is alot more to it.

There's also a lot more to it, which most tribunals aren't equipped to take into account, unless they inconvenience themselves by hiring an "expert" to explain issues to them. Stuff like the psychological damage incurred from living in a war-zone, The retardation of ethical and intellectual development that trauma can cause, and a hundred other factors that the state can't be arsed to care about.

So again, is UK society supposed to absorb this? Or do you see matters such as organised crime small issues in the big scheme of things? Not once have I said that someone genuinely fleeing persecution (or the example of the Iraqi teacher you gave) shouldn't be allowed here.

What you're doing is setting up an arbitrary dividing line between "good" immigrants" and "bad" immigrants, with people like you deciding, based on a ridiculously-flawed official viewpoint, who's "good" and who's "bad".

The Powers that be love things the way they are - more money from the blackmarket/illegal workers as well divide and conquer among the people.

The powers-that-be love whatever serves them best, which includes employing useful idiots like you.

 

[sovereignb]

I don't know why you quoted me you miserable shit but you have the common humanity of a cool original flavoured dorito.

it used to be a matter of pride that we took in the people hounded by torture and inhumanity and risk of immediate death. When did the likes of you get in charge. What happened. We are suposed to be england, we'll take any old bod. Better that than the bod get fingernails pulled out in a sunless cell for organising.

what a cunt you are SB. I've just realised that your username is soveriegnb, as in sovereign borders. On a tiny island with a vast history of population flux, in and out. Go fuck yourself.

With all due respect you p***k, you dont know me or the origin of my username. I wont waste anymore time with you.

All that measuring of bones and stuff seems so backward I didn't believe it when I was first told about it.

But I suppose, until we find some way to communicate with people and simply ask them how old they are, it will just have to do.

Do you believe claimants are not asked their age? Of course they are. The response to that question will determine how much support they get (as a "child" or an "adult").

Your the only one who seems capable of having a sensible discussion about the matter. I should have learnt from my post last year how very defensive people get, latching onto paragraphs instead the whole context. Im talking about a specific type/group of people in a particular situation (from my field of work and i am NOT an immigration officer, very far from it)

Of course i'm aware of the criminals already in the UK, which we struggle to deal with. I'm not saying persecute all asylum seekers based on the bad ones. I'm saying deal with them appropriately, like you would any criminal, including a British person doing criminal acts abroad. In my eyes, appropriately would not include granting asylum (when they are not actually fleeing persecution). Again i can only speak from my angle of work, which would deal with people who have made it to the UK, so i cant comment much on those waiting at Calais like your example of the Aghani.Though examples like that is where the work is really required to make the system fairer.

The system needs a complete overhaul. But its very clear the views of most in here so very much pointless trying to discuss it.

 

[sovereignb]

AKA "immigrants with money".

Thats your view, not mine.


because, of course, we don't already have "dregs of society" here, governing us, patrolling our streets, running financial institutions...

yes, so lets just welcome some more.

What you're doing is setting up an arbitrary dividing line between "good" immigrants" and "bad" immigrants, with people like you deciding, based on a ridiculously-flawed official viewpoint, who's "good" and who's "bad".

ridiculously-flawed official viewpoint???? organised crime is good??? ok...

 

[phildwyer]

yes, so lets just welcome some more.

Why not? They're young, work hard, pay taxes (even illegal immigrants pay taxes). With our rapidly aging population, we need them.

Quite apart from the fact that cultural diversity is healthy in itself.