BS: Britain shamed before world - Windrush

Subject: RE: BS: Britain shamed before world - Windrush
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 27 Apr 18 - 07:59 AM

Jim,
You are defending something that your Government has agreed was wrong

A blatant lie Jim. Quote me doing it.

SPB,
The whole issue is 100% around the hostile environment policy,.....As it is 100% a party policy

Labour's last Immigration Minister said he wanted to create "a much more hostile environment" to "flush out" illegal migrants.

Subject: RE: BS: Britain shamed before world - Windrush
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 27 Apr 18 - 07:29 AM

You are defending something that your Government has agreed was wrong and has grovellingly apologised for
All the debate surrounding immigration is about scapegoating - it always has been since the days of "they are only here to steal or jobs and women
Sorry - no intention of becoming involved with someone even more extreme - I'll leave you to your anti-immigration soab-boxingthan those who implemented inhuman policy in the first place
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Britain shamed before world - Windrush
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 27 Apr 18 - 07:12 AM

What we are seeing here is the effects of a "don't blame us - it's all these foreigners faults that you are having problems" scapegoating policy

No it is not.
No-one has supported what has happened and there has been no "scapegoating."

Subject: RE: BS: Britain shamed before world - Windrush
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 27 Apr 18 - 07:05 AM

The question of "restrictions" do not apply to this case - those who are experiencing problems now are legally here and are so as the repayment of a debt own to ex colonial countries whose exploitation made Britain the wealthiest and placed here among the most powerful in the world
In my opinion, that debt was only partially paid, but if people included in its payment are treated as they are being, god help those still suffering with the hangover of Empire
What we are seeing here is the effects of a "don't blame us - it's all these foreigners faults that you are having problems" scapegoating policy
It's a policy that sent millions to the extermination camps during my lifetime
The rise in racism in Britain is an indication that things could get worse in this respect
Why blame Britain for something others do?
Because in acting the way they do our government has shames us all - that's why
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Britain shamed before world - Windrush
From: SPB-Cooperator
Date: 27 Apr 18 - 06:51 AM

A statement like 'all countries have restrictions' is entirely helpful, and potentially dangerous.

While all countries made their own legislation, in areas concerning migration, changes to legislation must only apply to those from the point legislation changes, and it is the responsibility of government to prove the status beyond any doubt whatsoever of the individual, not the responsibility of the individual to prove otherwise.

Further, the government has placed a further burdon on employers and service providers to seek irrefutable proof of entitlemenr on pain of financial penalties.

The whole issue has nothing to do whatsover whether the individual has documentary proof whether or not they are acting legally or illegally (lets take a hypothetical case where the CPS has the power to prosecute anyone who cannot provide proof that they have never shoplifted. The whole issue is 100% around the hostile environment policy, and I look forward to successful prosecutions against employers for direct discrimination on the ground of refusing employment to avoid being prosecuted for obeying hostile environment legislation, health services for refusing treatment, landlords for refusing tenancies etc. As it is 100% a party policy their must be no recourse whatsoever to the tax payer for any compnsation, but but be raised 100% by the tory party and its supporters.

Subject: RE: BS: Britain shamed before world - Windrush
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 27 Apr 18 - 06:02 AM

Are you really defending a sick act that a Government has been forced to apologise for Keith
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Britain shamed before world - Windrush
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 27 Apr 18 - 04:20 AM

Kevin,
There is no such evidence of illegal immigration, only absence of evidence of legal status.

Of course there is.

I do not accept that. It is possible to prove you are legal, but absence of such proof is the only way to prove illegality.

As I asked, Keith, how would you go about proving your legal right to be here if challenged?

Birth Certificate. The problem is with folk born overseas and arrived as children without needing documentation then, but needing it now.

Jim,
"All countries have restrictions. "
Sez it all really - OK to turn ordinary people into criminals and deport them as long as it's sanctioned by Governments

What it sez is that no country allows unrestricted entry. It sez it is unfair to criticise this country for being the same as every other.

Subject: RE: BS: Britain shamed before world - Windrush
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 26 Apr 18 - 01:33 PM

And after Brexit we'll have it happening all over again. Go back to Poland to go to the dentist and they'll stop you at Dover.

But at least they'll have the freedom to settle all over Europe, which the British won't have.

Subject: RE: BS: Britain shamed before world - Windrush
From: Senoufou
Date: 26 Apr 18 - 01:31 PM

The whole thing is shameful. These people were used, plain and simple, to get the country back on its feet. They uprooted themselves, offered their labour and suffered racial abuse, low wages and poor accommodation. Then years later, used again to show how marvellous we are at reducing 'illegal immigrant' figures. They're just pawns in a political game.
They are NOT illegal immigrants in any sense. We should be thanking them profusely for their help at a time when we needed it.
The fact that the majority are black means that the racial persecution is even more despicable.
The Home Secretary should resign.

Subject: RE: BS: Britain shamed before world - Windrush
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 Apr 18 - 11:18 AM

"Jim - Don't do it! "
Wasn't going to - woke up in a good mood this morning
These expulsions have been going on for at least eight years
A West Indian/British woman interviewed this morning described how a relative visited family and on his return was refused an entry visa - still hasn't been able to return home despite petitions
Not only has it been happening, it's been covered up
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Britain shamed before world - Windrush
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 26 Apr 18 - 08:55 AM

There is no such evidence of illegal immigration, only absence of evidence of legal status.

Of course there is. it may be harder to assemble than a presumption of illegality, but it is necessary in any system aspiring to be committed to justice. That's why courts have to prove guilt rather than the accused to prove innocence.

Evidence about the circumstances of how someone came here and where they came from can provide evidence of illegality. It would then be up to the individual to counter that, if it could be countered. In the case of the Windrush generation any proof of the circumstances of their arrival would in itself serve to undermine any accusation of illegal status. If the authorities wished to counter that they would need to find some other evidence that for some reason their presence was actually illegal.

As I asked, Keith, how would you go about proving your legal right to be here if challenged?

Subject: RE: BS: Britain shamed before world - Windrush
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 26 Apr 18 - 03:55 AM

Jim - Don't do it!

Subject: RE: BS: Britain shamed before world - Windrush
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 Apr 18 - 03:50 AM

"All countries have restrictions. "
Sez it all really - OK to turn ordinary people into criminals and deport them as long as it's sanctioned by Governments
There's a word for that Keith
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Britain shamed before world - Windrush
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 26 Apr 18 - 03:19 AM

You look for evidence that they are illegal immigrants, rather than assume they are here illegally,

There is no such evidence of illegal immigration, only absence of evidence of legal status.

The problem here is that the Windrush generation were left with no evidence of their status, and given none. The system let them down, or more accurately betrayed them.

Subject: RE: BS: Britain shamed before world - Windrush
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 25 Apr 18 - 07:52 PM

Yes Dave, but how do you tell the difference?

You look for evidence that they are illegal immigrants, rather than assume they are here illegally, and throw the burden on them to find evidence that they are here legally.

If someone asked you to prove you were legally entitled to live here, and you couldn't get hold of a UK birth certificate, and didn’t have a passport, are you sure you could do so?
......................
Bonzo, I'm afraid you haven't actually registered that these people came here legally, as British subjects, born under the Union Jack, just not in the British Isles. They had every legal right to be there, and the British Government has now accepted that this was a giant cock-up.

It's different from what's happening in your countries - though the same kind of attitudes seem to lie behind the policy that's been followed for so many years. Keep Out.

Subject: RE: BS: Britain shamed before world - Windrush
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 25 Apr 18 - 09:18 AM

Jolly good!

Subject: RE: BS: Britain shamed before world - Windrush
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 25 Apr 18 - 08:34 AM

The people being discussed are not and never have been illegal immigrants, Bonzo. WTF are you on about?

Subject: RE: BS: Britain shamed before world - Windrush
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 25 Apr 18 - 07:44 AM

Illegal immigrants - they are what they are.

Subject: RE: BS: Britain shamed before world - Windrush
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 25 Apr 18 - 04:56 AM

All countries have restrictions.

Subject: RE: BS: Britain shamed before world - Windrush
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 25 Apr 18 - 04:34 AM

Deportee

Some of us are illegal, and some are not wanted,
Our work contract's out and we have to move on;
Six hundred miles to that Mexican border,
They chase us like outlaws, like rustlers, like thieves.

Goodbye to my Juan, goodbye, Rosalita,
Adios mis amigos, Jesus y Maria;
You won't have your names when you ride the big airplane,
All they will call you will be "deportees"

Let's stop calling our fellow human beings "illegal" or "illegals." If you can throw out ugly terms like that there's something wrong with you.

Subject: RE: BS: Britain shamed before world - Windrush
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 25 Apr 18 - 04:30 AM

Yes Dave, but how do you tell the difference?
The Windrush generation are legal and welcome, or should be, but some have been left exposed to false doubt by changes to the rules.

It should not have happened, but what more could be done for them now by the government?

Subject: RE: BS: Britain shamed before world - Windrush
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 25 Apr 18 - 03:59 AM

But no one here is talking about illegal immigrants, Bonzo. These were people who were brought to the UK to help build our post war workforce, have lived, worked and paid taxes in the UK all their lives and now are faced with deportation due to the heartless and callous government that you support.

Subject: RE: BS: Britain shamed before world - Windrush
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 25 Apr 18 - 03:08 AM

Illegals should be found and removed, most people agree with that.

Subject: RE: BS: Britain shamed before world - Windrush
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 24 Apr 18 - 10:05 PM

National Public Radio (US public radio) played a long interview tonight to describe this event in the UK. Your Windrush goes along with Trump's getting rid of the protections for the Dreamers, or wanting to build a stupid wall.

Subject: RE: BS: Britain shamed before world - Windrush
From: The Sandman
Date: 24 Apr 18 - 09:38 AM

Disgraceful

Subject: RE: BS: Britain shamed before world - Windrush
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 24 Apr 18 - 06:37 AM

I would say that to "presume the good will of the objector" does not mean that you actually need to believe that that presumption accords with the truth. But to act in accordance with that presumption is necessary if there is to be any chance of a useful discussion. To do so is a willed action, rather than a reflection of opinion.

I'm in danger here of diverting this thread into a philosophical discussion which doesn't really belong here.

Out in the big world the Windrush episode appears to be having some significant developments. It's fascinating to see how Amber Rudd is trying to reposition herself as somehow not being herself responsible for the illegal actions which she condemns, and ostensively presents her self as correcting. (We'll see...)

Subject: RE: BS: Britain shamed before world - Windrush
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 24 Apr 18 - 03:07 AM

Yes, Kevin. Point taken. But to be honest I have tried over and over and over again only to have it thrown back in my face. I have given up and it feels really good. Like when you stop banging your head on a brick wall. I know it is probably my failing that I did not try harder but some people will try the patience of a saint.

But this thread is not my failings or those of anyone. It is about yet another failing of this dreadful government. Let's keep it at that and ignore the howls of protest that are likely to follow.

Thanks for taking the time to try and put me straight

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Britain shamed before world - Windrush
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 23 Apr 18 - 08:16 PM

Well I agree with all that, but with at least one remaining poster here the technique fails miserably. This bit: "...that is, by never outright denying a conclusion, the Master presumes the good will of the objector..." in his case is clearly a false presumption. Not only is good will lacking (replaced by the will to win), sensible debate is impossible as the "objector" constantly aims to ignore his perceived opponents' fair sentiments and set traps. We've all seen people of good will involved in interminable attempts to reason with him, but they simply end up looking like chumps. Hence our call to everyone to resist jumping through hoops and, instead, to talk past him. Sometimes, Kevin, even "the Master" might have admitted failure and simply shrugged and turned his back.

Subject: RE: BS: Britain shamed before world - Windrush
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 23 Apr 18 - 07:44 PM

Fair enough Keith. I find it hard to read what I wrote in the sense that you understood it, but evidently I should have made my meaning clearer.
..........................
I believe we should always try to understand people we are engaged with in an exchange of views in a way that treats them with respect, and on the basis that they believe what they say to be true, and always to try to identify points of agreement. That even, and indeed especially, applies when we might doubt the honesty of those with whom we are dealing. (That is addressed to Dave, rather than Keith.)

Thisa tradition of disputation that has a long history, and I think it particularly relevant in the context of the internet. Here is a surprisingly relevant blog article that repays serious study.

Subject: RE: BS: Britain shamed before world - Windrush
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Apr 18 - 01:27 PM

I agree with the first sentence Kevin.
You did not make it clear that the second sentence only applied to people who arrived legally.
Now you have made it clear, I agree with you.

Dave, you are such a stirrer.

Subject: RE: BS: Britain shamed before world - Windrush
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 23 Apr 18 - 12:56 PM

He does that, Kevin. I thought you had been around long enough to know.

Subject: RE: BS: Britain shamed before world - Windrush
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 23 Apr 18 - 12:31 PM

Keith - you took those words out of context, and removed some very significant qualifying words from the abbreviated sentence you gave.

Here is the post I made:
If someone has demonstrated that they were legally in this country at one point, and they have no passport, how can it be relevant or reasonable to require that they have been here continuously since that date?

Making those kinds of demands of proof, and denying someone's right to stay on the basis that they cannot produce documentary evidence is clearly unreasonable and abusive harassment.

I was talking about where unrealistic demands for specific bits of evidence are demanded, and other kinds of evidence, however compelling, are excluded. Read the case histories which are readily available, and see if you can reconcile them with honourable behaviour on the part of those responsible. And

Subject: RE: BS: Britain shamed before world - Windrush
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Apr 18 - 04:28 AM

Steve,
We already know from the air strikes that Theresa May is Donald Trump's poodle.

That would make Macron a poodle too, even though he was prepared to take independent action.

Kevin,
denying someone's right to stay on the basis that they cannot produce documentary evidence is clearly unreasonable and abusive harassment.

Then how could illegal migrants be removed from a country?

Subject: RE: BS: Britain shamed before world - Windrush
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 23 Apr 18 - 03:56 AM

I dealt with the matter of the decision to destroy the landing cards on 20 April at 07.54am. I hoped to circumvent the possibility of some dolt bringing it up as a gratuitous attack on Labour, in vain it seems. Oh well.

Even if they deserve it, please don't use this thread to bash Labour. It was obviously set up to bash the Tories!

Subject: RE: BS: Britain shamed before world - Windrush
From: Mr Red
Date: 23 Apr 18 - 03:52 AM

If you counted the votes for, and other I think that minority might well be a majority. Like the Trump/Clinton statistics.

And if you counted the non-voters you can reasonably absolutely assume that the present government was voted in by a minority of the electorate** and even adding "biggest" must be predicated by the above paragraph.

**argueist are reminded to read as written, not as read!

Subject: RE: BS: Britain shamed before world - Windrush
From: SPB-Cooperator
Date: 22 Apr 18 - 05:21 PM

The minority who voted against them runs to millions to.

Subject: RE: BS: Britain shamed before world - Windrush
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 22 Apr 18 - 06:42 AM

We all know that, Kevin, but the rules were brought in by a party hell bent on clinging to control even if that meant pandering to the worse excesses of xenophobic little Englanders. Roll on the demise of this hateful administration.

Subject: RE: BS: Britain shamed before world - Win
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 22 Apr 18 - 06:09 AM

If someone has demonstrated that they were legally in this country at one point, and they have no passport, how can it be relevant or reasonable to require that they have been her continuously since that date?

Making those kinds of demands of proof, and denying someone's right to stay on the basis that they cannot produce documentary evidence is clearly unreasonable and abusive harassment.

Subject: RE: BS: Britain shamed before world - Windrush
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 22 Apr 18 - 04:49 AM

But there are millions of people who voted for them, and only a minority who voted against them. It's not just a few rotten apples at the top of the barrel.

But in any case there's a difference between shame and guilt. Those of us who voted against this lot can maybe protest reasonably that we aren't guilty of putting them in power, but that doesn't mean we don't feel shamed at what they have brought about in this long drawn out affair.

Look across the Atlantic - if you're American you don't need to have voted for Trump to feel shamed by his being President. You don't need to have picked up an assault rifle to feel ashamed of your country's record of massacres.

Subject: RE: BS: Britain shamed before world - Windrush
From: SPB-Cooperator
Date: 22 Apr 18 - 01:54 AM

The thread should read British prime Minister and former Home Secretary and the right wing bigots she sucks up to shamed before the world. Those of urnbment, and those of us who reject wholeheartedly the idea of 'hostile environment' have absolutely nothing to be personally ashamed of, and should be proud that except for the government we are an open looking country which welcomes the enrichment that comes from those who honour us by aspiring to be our citizens.

Subject: RE: BS: Britain shamed before world - Windrush
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 21 Apr 18 - 06:57 PM

"If one is born in the U.K. is one then a natural citizen?"

No - unlike the situation in most of the American continent. Before 1983 it was the case, but then it was abolished by Margaret Thatcher. Now you have to have one parent a British subject. The result is that there are thousands of children in the UK deprived of citizenship, and of associated rights.

I understand the SNP intend to restore the right of anyone born in the country to be a citizen should they achieve independence. In keeping with that, in the referendum on independence, all residents could vote, regardless of nationality. In the Westminster referendum on EU membership only citizens had the vote. Nor did UK citizens resident elsewhere in the EU.So the people who were most adversely affected had no say in the decision. If they had that the outcome could well have been very different.

Subject: RE: BS: Britain shamed before world - Windrush
From: David Carter (UK)
Date: 21 Apr 18 - 03:42 PM

No robomatic, one is not, unless one is born to a parent who is a British citizen of is settled in the UK. The UK, like Australia, has abolished the jus soli principle, and people born in the country are no longer automatically entitled to citizenship.

Subject: RE: BS: Britain shamed before world - Windrush
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 21 Apr 18 - 03:03 PM

We already know from the air strikes that Theresa May is Donald Trump's poodle. Well who'd have thought that she'd been Gordon Brown's poodle too... :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Britain shamed before world - Windrush
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 21 Apr 18 - 02:39 PM

Good argument, well made, Bonzo. Well, better than most Tory tripe anyway.

Subject: RE: BS: Britain shamed before world - Windrush
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 21 Apr 18 - 02:36 PM

"Bonzo, I can't believe that you are trying to blame Labour for this. Labour did not destroy any landing cards, officials under Labour did not do so either. If it was thought at the time that these were not necessary, this is because nobody at the time could possibly forsee the extent to which the tories under May, first at the Home Office and then as PM, would pander to the disgusting xenophobia of UKIP, BNP, EDL etc. This is entirely at May's door, and she should go, and preferably take with her the entire Tory edifice."

dum de dum de dum!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Britain shamed before world - Windrush
From: robomatic
Date: 21 Apr 18 - 02:01 PM

If one is born in the U.K. is one then a natural citizen?

Subject: RE: BS: Britain shamed before world - Windrush
From: Mr Red
Date: 21 Apr 18 - 01:41 PM

Anyone know where the Windrush was built or what it was called when launched? Or who had it built? And why?

er - try the Hitler regime and as a publicity exercise. We call it PR these days.

Subject: RE: BS: Britain shamed before world - Windrush
From: Kenny B (inactive)
Date: 21 Apr 18 - 10:34 AM

Steve
Can I just say "Oh ye of little faith"

Subject: RE: BS: Britain shamed before world - Windrush
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 21 Apr 18 - 10:29 AM

I dealt with the matter of the decision to destroy the landing cards on 20 April at 07.54am. I hoped to circumvent the possibility of some dolt bringing it up as a gratuitous attack on Labour, in vain it seems. Oh well.

Subject: RE: BS: Britain shamed before world - Windrush
From: Senoufou
Date: 21 Apr 18 - 04:07 AM

I can remember the arrivals of many Commonwealth people to help get the country on its feet just after the War (early fifties). I lived in W London and many were recruited for London Transport, the Wolf Rubber factory and nurses for the large London hospitals, to name but a few jobs in that area.
I also remember those terrible signs put up in windows of rooms-to-let:
NO IRISH NO BLACKS NO DOGS and the overt racism and hostility directed towards immigrants.
They bravely weathered it and carried on, good workers and good citizens. And now this...

I can vouch for the idiocy and incompetence of the wretched Home Office. They were/are a bunch of nasty pigs. They caused my husband and me untold stress, worry and literally thousands of pounds (which was never recovered) due to what the Appeal judge called 'a basic error, plain and simple' (God bless the man!). They were nigh on impossible to contact, arrogant and rude in their attitude and made us despair.
Even those words "The Home Office", all these years later, engenders a kind of post-traumatic stress reaction in us both!