Just Who Are Amnesty International Trying To Kid ?

[paraffin]

A report on the BBC lunchtime news today stated that some 10,000 failed asylum seekers from Zimbabwe are still at large in the UK.

A spokeswoman from AI claimed that the people in question are funded by friends and supporters, not the State.

I'll now duck to avoid the flying pigs soaring overhead.

[sp1814]

paraffin

Just so we're all clear, are you saying that there are

a) that there are lot more than 10,000 Zimbabwean failed asylum seekers

b) that there are lot less than 10,000 Zimbabwean failed asylum seekers

c) The present government have a scheme whereby they actually pay failed asylum seekers to stay in the country???

Have a look at this article:

http://www.amnesty.org.uknews_details.asp?News ID=17158

Why do you think Amnesty is making up such horrible lies?

Perhaps they want to be invited round to Bono's house for a tofu and cheese party?

Or perhaps they've done some research into the issue?

[rov1200]

I also saw that report. They are being fed in that drop in centre so there's no need to starve.

But they have had their case examined by the authorities and are treated as bogus. They were given the opportunity to return to their own country but they still insist on staying here. Why? They should have been forcibly removed if not to Zimbabwe then to a neighboring country such as South Africa or most probably the point of entry ie France.. I think they are waiting for an Amnesty where they can be a financial burden on the state.

[sp1814]

rov1200 - why would a neighbouring country accept Britain's offloaded failed asylum seekers?

[rov1200]

Haven't you heard, we are not allowed into Zimbabwe so do you suggest we drop them off by parachute? How did they arrive here in the first place, probably through France and if so the way they should be returned.

[sp1814]

We can't just bung them over to France, unless we have evidence that the French somehow colluded with the asylum seekers.

The French immigration service would just laugh at the suggestion.

[paraffin]

Guys, what struck me most about the report was that one person highlighted in it had apparently had her case rejected as far back as 2004 but is still here.

The report (and AI) seemed to suggest that all the failed asylum seekers were somehow not a burden on the State. So, are we expected to believe that around about the estimated 10,000 of them are getting by simply with help and handouts from friends and sympathisers?

So, where do they all live? How do they feed and clothe themselves? Who pays any medical bills they may incur? etc etc etc ?

The very fact that who knows how many had their cases rejected years ago and are still here is cause for concern.

And now that Zimbabwe has a shared government, none of them could use the old chestnut, "I fear for my life if I'm returned", as a valid excuse for remaining here in good old Blighty ad infinitum.

I'm sure that nice Mr Morgan Tsvangarai (condolences for the loss of his wife) would ensure that nasty Mr Mugabe did nothing horrible to those returning home.

Genuine asylum seekers coming here deserve the help and succour which we have to offer. But those who are bogus and merely seeking a free ride should be returned to
sender.

[buildersmate]

The processing system for asylum applications was incredibly slow. It may have now improved a bit but there's still a heck of lot of them out there.
Once failed, many asylum seekers just melt away into the community - it is impossible to lock them all up awaiting completion of the legal appeal process.
Even when that has been gone through, there are many countries where it is impossible to repatriate FAS - Zimbabwe is one of those countries - though this may eventually change over time.
FAS are not provided with benefit resources from the State and cannot legally work either - but still many of them cling on in there.