BS: Britain shamed before world - Windrush

Subject: BS: Britain's shame - Windrush
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 20 Apr 18 - 07:17 AM

It's hard to remember a more shameful episode than has been exposed in the "Windrush" affair. Thousands of people from Commonwealth countries, who have been living and working for half a century or more, with every legal right to be here, bullied and threatened by the British government, in many cases deprived of their right to work or rent a home, or even drive a car, or have needed medical treatment; even locked up while waiting to be deported to countries which they may never have seen.

So far we don't know how many people were actually deported, let alone how many gave up and went into exile in face of unrelenting bureaucratic bullying. The Home Office evidently does not bother to keep records of stuff like that - fittingly enough, since they made a point of destroying all the records they had of their arrivals.

And the person personally responsible for all this, as Home Secretary at the time these policies were set in motion, and Prime Minister when they came to fruition, says "sorry for any anxiety caused". Yes, she's embarrassed now it has become impossible to shrug it off in the way it has been shrugged off for years while case after case of appalling injustice has been reported to her. But not a hint of the response that would be more appropriate than embarrassment - a sense of shame.

But of course if she had any sense of shame about this she would resign. Failing that she should be sacked. I hope the Opposition tables a motion of censure. It would be interesting to see which MPs would have the brass neck to oppose it.

Subject: RE: BS: Britain shamed before world - Windrush
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 20 Apr 18 - 07:54 AM

Yes, Home Secretary Theresa May, she of the grubby half-apology, who was instrumental in creating a "hostile environment" and who signed off the disgraceful Adbus campaign. She was, of course, struggling with the Tories' proudly-trumpeted policy of "getting net migration down to the tens of thousands," an impossible target as there was no way of preventing free movement of EU citizens. Of course, non-EU citizens, including the Windrush generation, were much easier targets, hence the "hostile environment." Even more disgracefully, she's tried to level blame at Labour for the decision to destroy the Windrush landing cards. But that bureaucratic decision, clumsy as it now seems, was made without malice before there was political pressure to reduce immigration and was made at a time when there was no "hostile environment." And it WAS the Tories who destroyed them!

And let's not forget that she lied to the country about the Tory immigration policy once it had failed, trying to tell us that it had never been an election promise, "just an aspiration." She was a terrible Home Secretary and she's a terrible prime minister. Terrible and incompetent.

Subject: RE: BS: Britain shamed before world - Windrush
From: Will Fly
Date: 20 Apr 18 - 08:11 AM

Amen to all of that. She, Rudd and the Home Office are a disgrace. Thoroughly disgusting.

Subject: RE: BS: Britain shamed before world - Windrush
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 20 Apr 18 - 08:59 AM

It didn't just affect the people who had arrived here perfectly legally all those years ago - the children of such people have been finding that they also are seen as non-persons, unable to work, or go to college and so forth.

I think these need to be recognised as not just immoral unjust and illegal acts on the part of the government, but as nothing short of criminal conspiracy. Will the Crown Prosecution Service have the courage to allow the courts to decide? No chance - the normal reason given for not prosecuting is that it's judged unlikely there could be a conviction. In this case the reason would be that the chance of conviction is only too high, if a jury had the chance.

Subject: RE: BS: Britain shamed before world - Windrush
From: Dave Hanson
Date: 20 Apr 18 - 10:31 AM

Amber Crudd and theresa may or may not should both resign over this disgrace.

Dave H

Subject: RE: BS: Britain shamed before world - Windrush
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 20 Apr 18 - 02:01 PM

We in the UK sometimes tend to look at stories in the media about stuff that happens in the USA - gun violence and grotesque affronts to humanity like Trump, and feel a bit smug that, for all of our faults as a society, that could never happen here.

Here's a case where I am pretty sure that the boot is on the other foot. I can't see a government getting away for years with this gross abuse of human rights of Americans. Am I right?

Subject: RE: BS: Britain shamed before world - Windrush
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 20 Apr 18 - 02:06 PM

The interview with the old West Indian Lady who had been arrested, put in detention and threatened with detention came just after the Stephen Lawrence documentaries this week
Makes you proud to be British
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Britain shamed before world - Windrush
From: DMcG
Date: 20 Apr 18 - 02:50 PM

Don't forget 'Windrush'is just a convenient identifier. There will be many more affected in a similar way but not so easy to group.

Subject: RE: BS: Britain shamed before world - Windrush
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 20 Apr 18 - 04:02 PM

True 'Windrush" is just a label applied to 50,000 people who have been living in fear, all those who came from Commonwealth countries before 1973 when the then (Labour) Government changed the law to keep black people out. Anybody who hasn't held on to various bits of paper they've decided are relevant. (Stuff like tax records, for example, don't count.)

It's not just needing to prove you came before the cut-off date. They demand proof that you haven’t been out of the country for more than two years. Quite how they demand proof of that from people who haven't ever had any reason to get a passport, I can't understand. But then, you aren't supposed to understand.

And after Brexit we can expect to have the same thing happening to people from other EU countries. Yes they might be promised a right to stay, but so were the "Windrush" generation, and their children and grandchildren. Till the Nasty party moved into action.

How many people, any of us, would be able to pass these tests and prove they had been continuously here, in face of officials that work on the assumption people are lying through their teeth?

Subject: RE: BS: Britain shamed before world - Windrush
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 20 Apr 18 - 04:37 PM

I am ashamed to be British. My Polish passport application is looking better but sadly my father's country is also suffering from the wave of right wing xenophobia that is plaguing us. What is happening to people? I don't remember the events leading up to the Nazis taking power but the lessons should be plain enough for all to see. Mind you, I expect we will soon get an example of the little Englander attitude in here :-(

Subject: RE: BS: Britain shamed before world - Windrush
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 20 Apr 18 - 06:26 PM

Theresa May has promised that all the people who have been hit by her policies in this scandal will be fully compensated for financial loss and distress.

Of course we should remember the glib promises she made in face of the Grenfell fire, and the revelations of developers being encouraged to reduce standards of cladding etc.

Which of course turned out to be empty promises - but they served their purpose of weathering the media storm.

Once the heat is off, I wonder what will actually happen. I hope people will keep a good eye on the vicar's daughter. Of course I really hope that she'll be out of public life, and someone with a sense of honour might be in her place. But I suppose that requires a general election - none of the papabili among her own party could conceivably meet the fairly low ethical standard.

Subject: RE: BS: Britain shamed before world - Windrush
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 20 Apr 18 - 06:46 PM

I just can't believe that I'm seeing good, honest, upright, hard-working people, who've lived here for decades and contributed fully to the life of the country, suddenly pitched into uncertainty, insecurity and the feeling that they have nowhere where they belong. This has sent me raving mad for the last couple of days and Mrs Steve is right up there with me. Just imagine that you'd lived in a country all your adult life to then be told that this isn't your home, and that you haven't got a home, so tough luck. But she's going to get away with this, isn't she?

Subject: RE: BS: Britain shamed before world - Windrush
From: Roughyed
Date: 20 Apr 18 - 06:52 PM

She has been very careful to avoid committing to identify people who have been wrongly deported and bring them back. The Huffington Post has a leaked email showing that she thought the Go Back vans weren't strongly enough worded. She is on record saying that a minister in 2014 should take responsibility for mistakes in her department and resign. Her position is untenable and if Rudd is forced out,she could well follow and the government with her. Fingers crossed.

Subject: RE: BS: Britain shamed before world - Windrush
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 20 Apr 18 - 07:18 PM

The principle of ministerial responsibility generally accepted in theory is that if serious mistakes are made, and this is the fault of administration interpreting policy in a way that goes against the intention of the minister, the responsibility rests on the officers rather than the minister. But if the mistakes are the result of carrying out the policy of the minister, it is the minister who should resign. That applies even if some of the consequences were not fully appreciated by the minister. (After all conviction for dangerous driving does not require that the driver intended to drive dangerously.)

In this case it seems clear that it was the latter, most especially in the case of Theresa May. It is impossible to see how she can remain in office without effectively destroying the doctrine of ministerial responsibility. This was a disastrous car crash with her at the wheel.

Subject: RE: BS: Britain shamed before world - Windrush
From: Donuel
Date: 20 Apr 18 - 08:12 PM

It is an old story. You can go back 50 years https://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2018/04/20/603884872/an-anti-immigration-speech-divided-britain-50-years-ago-it-still-ech
a hundred years or 2000 years.

The 'other'and the 'different' are always scorned.
The men respondsible are called heroes or villains.
Now women can play that game

Subject: RE: BS: Britain shamed before world - Windrush
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 20 Apr 18 - 08:20 PM

That's a good reminder, Donuel, not lost on us Brits at the moment. But this woman is our prime minister. Enoch wasn't. His horrid speech resounds down the decades, shamefully. But this woman is actually in charge.

Subject: RE: BS: Britain shamed before world - Windrush
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 21 Apr 18 - 01:48 AM

The fact that the decision to destroy landing cards for these people was taken by a Labour government in 2009 clearly and conveniently goes unnoticed!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Britain shamed before world - Windrush
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 21 Apr 18 - 02:14 AM

The initial decision to destroy the cards was indeed made while Labour was in office, though not by the minister, but the cards were not in fact destroyed until the October after the May election. By that time worries about the possible effects of the proposal had been raised by offices.

It was a remarkably stupid thing to do, and I hope that those responsible for it will be identified and shamed. But in itself it wouldn't have mattered too much if a new policy of harassing immigrants and creating "a hostile environment" had not been introduced subsequently. This meant a totally unrealistic burden of proof was imposed on them, with an assumption that they were lying, coupled with a strict policy of forbidding any flexibility or use of common sense and common humanity on the part of those given the responsibility for enforcing the new regime.

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

The decision was not made by the Labour government Bonzo but by an unelected bureaucrat in whitehall. The action was ratified and implemented on May's watch. But feel free to keep up the mudslinging. This typical Tory tactic is doing Labour's popularity No harm at all.

Subject: RE: BS: Britain shamed before world - Windrush
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 21 Apr 18 - 03:05 AM

"The fact that the decision to destroy landing cards for these people was taken by a Labour government in 2009 "
Why do you people do this Bozo - are human beings so unimportant to you and yours for you to make political gain out of their misery ?
Immigrants were not given official documents in the Windrush days
These letters from The Times, from two people with insider knowledge of the affair (particularly the first writer) makes the situation of Commonwealth citizens entering Britain perfectly clear.
Jim Carroll

Windrush papers
Sir,
I am a bit bemused by the talk of Windrush arrivals in the 1950s and early 1960s having either landing cards or registration slips that were retained by the Home Office and reportedly destroyed comparatively recently. There was no immigration control relating to Commonwealth citizens at all before the passing of the Commonwealth Immigrants Act 1962; on arrival in the UK they showed their passports to an immigration officer and were allowed to enter no landing card, no stamp in the passport, nothing to record their arrival. Hence, I cannot think what these documents could have been.
The 1962 Act introduced a control of a sort but in its early days it was fairly light It was not until about late 1965 that a time limit of six months was imposed on Commonwealth visitors, but even then there was no automatic check-out procedure; if the immigration officer wished a person’s departure to be confirmed he completed the landing card and indicated in the passport that a card should be completed on departure, again by the immigration officer, and submitted to confirm embarkation. It was thus possible at that time for a Commonwealth citizen to be admitted for six months with no record of the arrival and no one would know if they left or overstayed.
PETER HILLMAN
Former chief immigration officer (Immigration Service 1965-2010), Horsham, W Sussex

Sir,
In my 33 years as a judge I dealt with thousands of immigration appeals. It is certainly the case that when Theresa May was home secretary she deliberately created a hostile environment for immigrants. On her watch immigration law, never simple, became of byzantine, bizarre complexity and with increasingly stringent and draconian provisions. This was not helped by the fact that the Home Office was, and manifestly still is, dysfunctional and not fit for purpose. If you are not an immigrant you may think that all this does not matter to you. It does, because it affects the rule of law and, thus, every man, woman and child in this country.
DR STEPHEN PACEY
North Muskham, Notts

Subject: RE: BS: Britain shamed before world - Windrush
From: DMcG
Date: 21 Apr 18 - 03:24 AM

I have mentioned before that my daughter - born of English parents in an English hospital, lived in the UK her entire life and in possession of a UK passport was denied Job Seekers allowance and other benefits after she spent just over a year working abroad because the rules said she was to be regarded as an EU citizen, not a UK one.

I can only imagine the obstacles Windrush and similar immigrants need to go through

Subject: RE: BS: Britain shamed before world - Windrush
From: David Carter (UK)
Date: 21 Apr 18 - 03:53 AM

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.

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!

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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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 - 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: 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 - 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: The Sandman
Date: 24 Apr 18 - 09:38 AM

Disgraceful

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: Bonzo3legs
Date: 25 Apr 18 - 03:08 AM

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