It's when it upsets all the right people:
Analysis of Home Office data by the Refugee Council suggests 9,000 people who would be accepted as refugees under current rules – those confirmed to have fled war or persecution following official checks – may no longer be given safety in the UK due to their means of arrival under the changes.
The charity’s chief executive, Enver Solomon, said that for decades people had taken “extraordinary measures to flee oppression”, but had gone on to become “law-abiding citizens playing by the rules and paying their taxes as proud Britons”.
And a lot of them haven't, Enver. But I expect none of those sort are ever housed near you, so why worry?
Steve Valdez-Symonds, refugee and migrants rights programme director at Amnesty International UK, branded the bill “legislative vandalism”, claimed it could “fatally undermine the right to asylum” and accused Patel of a “shameful dereliction of duty”, adding: “This reckless and deeply unjust bill is set to bring shame on Britain’s international reputation.”
Will it stop the 'asylum seekers' trying to get in illegally? If not, and I suspect it won't, then clearly our 'international reputation' is secure.
Sonya Sceats, chief executive of Freedom from Torture, described the plans as “dripping with cruelty” and an “affront to the caring people in this country who want a kinder, fairer approach to refugees”.
You mean these people? Fuck them, Sonya. I say that most sincerely.
More than 250 organisations – including the Refugee Council, the British Red Cross, Freedom from Torture, Refugee Action and Asylum Matters – have joined to form the coalition Together with Refugees to call for a more effective, fair and humane approach to asylum in the UK.
I like it when my enemies group together like this. It makes for easier targeting.
6 comments:
When so many of the usual suspects are screaming, you know you are hitting home. They talk of "(Sub) Human Rights" for their chosen meal ticket providers but ignore victims of their criminal activities. Why are the rights of those who break the law held higher than those of
the population who just want to get on with their lives?
Frankly, given they can afford to pay a small fortune to smugglers to get here why should they be termed poor and endangered?
'250 organisations'... but probably about 2,000 actual people tops, 90% of whom are lawyers, grievance hustlers and other members of the grifter class (but no authentic Britons whatsoever).
Is there some kind of alternate universe in which the first safe country available to those leaving human rights abusing shitholes is the UK?
I'd like to see the payroll for these charities / quangos.
It's now an old saying but as true now as it ever was. "When you are taking flak you are over the target."
"When so many of the usual suspects are screaming, you know you are hitting home."
Yup! As selsey steve points out, we're over the target.
"'250 organisations'... but probably about 2,000 actual people tops..."
As many as that..!?
"I'd like to see the payroll for these charities / quangos."
Those registered as such will be online!
Post a Comment