A pregnant woman in a wheelchair was tipped up and had her feet held by G4S staff as she was forcibly removed from the country.
The employees from the firm behind the Olympics security fiasco used substantial force and the 'risk of injury to the unborn child was significant', revealed a report.Well, what’s the alternative? Not deport anyone who is pregnant and kicks up a fuss?
You know just who would love that, don’t you? And here they all are:
Judith Dennis, of the Refugee Council, said the case was 'shocking' and called for the UK Border Agency (UKBA) to heed the report’s recommendations, which include that force should only ever be used against pregnant women and children 'in order to prevent harm'.That, however, is just what they claim they were doing:
The pregnant woman had been given a wheelchair to assist her in the departures area, said the inspectors. When she resisted, 'substantial force' was used by G4S staff and the wheelchair 'was tipped up with staff holding her feet'.
'At one point she slipped down from the chair and the risk of injury to the unborn child was significant,' the report said.
'There is no safe way to use force against a pregnant woman, and to initiate it for the purpose of removal is to take an unacceptable risk.'I don’t think it’s ‘unacceptable’ – she’s the one putting her baby at risk by resisting, after all. She wasn't the only one, either:
The pregnant woman’s husband had been disruptive the night before his family’s planned removal from Cedars, 'shouting and kicking doors, causing some damage', the report found.
'At one point it was judged that he had been trying to separate healthcare staff offering to examine his wife to take them hostage,' the report added.I rather doubt the Refugee Council concerns itself with the risks to anyone else, though.
'Staff were sufficiently concerned by his behaviour to take him to the "cool down" separation room in full personal protection equipment before his removal.'
The so-called 'cool down' room was 'stark and not conducive to helping people calm down', the inspectors added.What should it have had? Candles? Mood lighting? A cozy sofabed?
Get the fuckers out before she drops yet another benefit claimant on the Uk Taxpayer!
ReplyDeleteDear Anon @ 17:15
ReplyDeletePerhaps you have a point but do try a strong mouthwash. You can get quick results with fuming aqua fortis.
MTG...do be a good chap and FUCK OFF you noisome cunt!
ReplyDeleteThey had to get the woman out of the country before she had the little sod or else our taxpayer funded human rights battalions would claim she then had the right to stay here - and we would be lumbered with yet another couple (or three) of parasites! The sooner we are out of the EU, the better (can we make a condition of leaving the EU that Noggy and Melv have to stay in it?).
ReplyDeletePenseivat
the "cool down" separation room
ReplyDeleteHow does that work then?
What's the betting most of the staff at the 'Refugee Council' should have been bloody removed back to wherever they came from too, but managed to stay because of their ooman rights?
ReplyDeleteThe rest are the usual rich Marxist idiots who never have to live in the areas they have helped inundate with immigrants.
Don't mind me, I'm just congenitally cynical
"They had to get the woman out of the country before she had the little sod or else our taxpayer funded human rights battalions would claim she then had the right to stay here..."
ReplyDeleteSpot on!
"How does that work then?"
Well, it seems we can't do anything else when they kick off but put them in a room. Thanks to the do-gooders.
"What's the betting most of the staff at the 'Refugee Council' should have been bloody removed back to wherever they came from too.."
And their 'Guardian' reading English counterparts.
If someone has been told they have no right to reside here then if follows they cannot enjoy any other benefits of this country... including complaining to 'the authorities' or the media.
ReplyDeleteSave any incidents of this nature in future, make the Refugee Council responsible for deporting people. Failure to do so would mean financial penalties....let them lose their houses, wealth etc.
ReplyDelete