Speeding up the process means giving less time for appeals and all the stuff that immigration lawyers do.
(Which is a bit of an industry in itself it seems.)

Hmm…

Okay.

Lets expamd your self image of yourself to your complete sentence:

They always cringe with embarassment when they see a black man, wondering whether I’m going to beat them up or shout at them. Though I wouldn’t because I don’t see why I’d give a fuck.

How do you know that?

I probably wouldn’t even fight back effectively if someone attacked me.

Probably me neither. But who is the minority here?

Not me, not you.

It is the tits that try to say otherwise. Do not assume that pathetic white folk and Reza represent any sort of mainstream opinion. For that is what these people want you to do, they want you to see yourself as in a ghetto, as a victim, when you are no such thing.

I am perfectly fine with most people. I like living here, which I wouldn’t if the working class were what right-whingers think they are. Lucky that right-whingers talk bollocks, eh?

Exactly.

I am perfectly fine with most people. I like living here, which I wouldn’t if the working class were what right-whingers think they are. Lucky that right-whingers talk bollocks, eh?

And I take it that there are a lot of folk on your street that don’t think of you as:

wondering whether I’m going to beat them up or shout at them. Though I wouldn’t because I don’t see why I’d give a fuck.

Just because, I really wouldn’t want to have that self image….

That is about as pish as a BNP viewpoint, or Mr Angry, of the New Statesman.

What was his name again?

You’ll remember, even if I can’t…

Oh! Yeh!

Marcus

(mad dog)

Howe.

Hero to you is he?

There are a few BNP voters at work and on my street. They always cringe with embarassment when they see a black man, wondering whether I’m going to beat them up or shout at them. Though I wouldn’t because I don’t see why I’d give a fuck.

Rightwingers like Boyo really are anti-social little nerds.

Don’t take too much heed. No one else does.

No, you won’t, because you and your kind never go anywhere near genuinely working-class people, but use a caricature of the “white working class” (I’ve never had anyone spell it out to me how my interests differ from theirs because I’m not white, even though I work in the same job, live in the same community and use the same public services- maybe you could help?) to further your right-wing agenda.

In Croydon, it’s been said that two thirds of children under its care are ‘Unaccompanied Asylum-seeking Children’.
Can we take that a as fact and move on?
http://www.croydon.gov.uk/contents/documents/meetings/621015/805255/633060/Audit_Commission_Performanc1.pdf

From the report:

An unaccompanied asylum seeking child (UASC) is defined by the Home Office
as ‘a person who at the time of making the asylum application is, or (if there is no
proof) appears to be, under 18 and is applying in his or her own right and has no
relative or guardian in this country’.
2 There are currently around 10,000 unaccompanied asylum-seeking children
supported by local authorities in the UK including those over the age of 18
receiving a leaving care service. The annual intake of new cases has remained
static at about 3,000 for the last three years1. About two thousand of these will be
supported by councils. However, as described below, the number of new cases
supported by Croydon has increased steeply.

Reza, I hear what you say, and you’re entitled to your opinions. I don’t agree with your view, but am also a bit purturbed and confused by the opinions of this guy,
Philippe Legrain.
http://www.cato.org/weekly/index.php?vid_id=40

I saw him yesterday talking about something else entirely…
http://www.battleofideas.org.uk/index.php/2009/session_detail/2517/

…and would really like to hear him talking on this subject (of open borders) in more detail.

I saw him on youtube where he was saying that Denmark needed more immigrants, and he talked of Silicon Valley and workers to care for the elderly.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gLd_m5f0uPA

While I might agree with him mostly, I see that it’s a hugely contentious subject.

It may have something to do with the fact that those of us on the right are more likely to fork out a huge chunk of our hard-earned cash in taxes.

And that’ll be cash earned in the wealth-creating part of the economy, rather than the wealth-consuming part.

LoL! Do Righties still believe this bullet-ridden nonsense? Look at the US where most of the poorer states are heavily conservative.

Here a lot of Wealth is concentrated in big cities – more usually known as the home of the cosmopolitan liberal establishment.

Perhaps Reza is referring to old “rural” money? Much of which is bolstered by a huge array of govermment subsidies and characterised by a seething resentment of growing, self-generated and independent urban prosperity!

63,000 deported in 2007?

A good start!

Look, each one of those 63,000 will have cost the British taxpayer at least a thousand quid a head. That’s 63 million quid roght there.

The Froggies have it right; knowing THEM, it’s surprising they don’t demand a cornea or a kidney as a fee to cover the bother and the paperwork!

A long long time ago that was the first name that came to mind (what was on my mind I wonder?!).

Now I WILL be racist however, for they’re a cruel race the Welsh – my mum was evacuated to the valleys from the London slums and at their new school the dinner ladies refused to serve the Blitzed cockney gutter snipes lunch unless they asked for it in Welsh!

I don’t believe I’m racist by any dictionary definition. I care about the country and the culture I was raised in, as no doubt we all do. I have no objection whatsoever to managed immigration, but I do believe in assimilation over integration. Over the last 30 years I have seen my culture increasingly devalued, smeared and subject to a kind of reductionism by “intellectuals” like Bernard (scoff) which they would not dream of visiting on any other culture.

THAT’S a kind of inverted racism. The English middle class (not the Scots, Welsh etc mind) have sought to destroy the the identity of the English people for reasons put quite unapologetically by Andrew Neather above.

I mean – who would you rather nanny Lucinda and Nigel? Angry indigenous “chavs” or the wonderfully grateful immigrant?

I’ve wondered about this, and my pet theory is thus – the vote for the post-War Labour government gave the bourgeois classes such a shock (“they’ve voted Labour, the country won’t stand for it”) that subconsciously, or otherwise, they sought to do everything they could to destroy the identity and solidarity of the “people”. Of course, they “had” to have immigration because “no one” would do manual jobs, right? Or was it that they simply would not pay a fair wage?

The bourgeois left’s hatred of the working class was confirmed when the ungrateful bastards voted for Thatcher, and some of them even got rich and started having airs! Well, in-coming New Labour would make them pay for that, and have managed to push social mobility back to the 1950s. Oh yeah, and why not loosen the controls on immigration? Just don’t tell the morons in the working men’s clubs – they’re all Tories anyway – and they would never understand how hard it is to get a nanny these days who won’t answer back.

Phew. That’s my take, but then I’m no intellectual, so what do I know.

My understanding is that most people awaiting deportation are on immigration bail. Those who are detained are people who have breached their immigration bail conditions. So I am not really sure what you do. Do you think it would be fairer to take the children of illegal immigrants who are detained into foster care or care homes pending deportation? Or do you think that people who have children should get a free pass to breach their bail conditions?

I genuinely don’t know the answer. Neither option really works, but I think most children would probably prefer to be detained with their parents rather than separated from them.

It may have something to do with the fact that those of us on the right are more likely to fork out a huge chunk of our hard-earned cash in taxes.

And that’ll be cash earned in the wealth-creating part of the economy, rather than the wealth-consuming part.

The sundry lefties suckling at the teat of the tax-payer, whether that is as students, benefit claimants or Public Sector employees, can afford to be generous with other peoples money.

Client State parasites that they are.

I suppose that makes it ok then!

It’s no wonder that when some illegal migrant does in this country the response many come out with is “thank god he didn’t steal my money”

that’s right-wing compassion for you.

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/tm_objectid=15898324&method=full&siteid=50082&headline=official—-boyo–is-a-racist-insult–name_page.html

Yes, your an auto-racist, a person who hates himself on racial grounds, and in calling yourself Boyo, you have committed an auto-racist crime against yourself. Shame on you Boyo bach, for offending yourself and hurting your own feelings! By the way, are you the Boyo who was in Воронеж? If so, приветочка!

Deportations couldn’t take place without some kind of detention if the people concerned refused an order to leave the country (when asked).

If you can’t seperate parents from their children, I’m not sure what should be done.
Have the children stay with their parents at night, but be taken outside everyday to attend school and to go on trips to town and sports centers?

Reading the website of National Coalition of Anti-Deportation Campaigns is grim.
http://www.ncadc.org.uk/

At Charles de Gaulle airport in Paris, they have 1000 children arriving by air as unaccompanied migrant children a year.
It seems that many of them are sent back to where they’ve just come from, putting them at all kinds of risk.

This seems to be one of those areas where you choose to be hard hearted or humane.
And being ”humane” means having to accept that a certain amout of mickey taking will be made of your country’s immigration and asylum policy.

He crosses many ’safe’ countries to get to France; NOTE: this is an important point.

Assuming he doesn’t get subjected to such rough anal rape in the Calais ‘Jungle’ that he is hospitalised in France or is, perhaps, stabbed so severely that he needs lengthy hospital treatment*, his luck is in and he stows away on a truck and – unhappily – he then gets caught in England.

So he ends up behind barbed wire and every Guardianista saphead can weep and wail about the cruelty of keeping such “children” behind barbed wire.

Boys his age served on the Gallipoli expedition.

* If Little Ahmed ends up in a French hospital, the French taxpayer foots the bill. Merci bien!