This & that

[juliet]

The Home Office now stopping people in the street on the basis of their race (& note also that they want to stop benefits/housing for failed asylum seekers with small kids, as well. So we're getting rid of them by starving their children, are we? Fantastic).

And a less depressing link:
the Underground turned upside-down (picked this up off someone else a couple of weeks ago).

Hunt Bill being discussed today. Thumbs crossed...

Interesting site showing current US voting polls - bit depressing atm, though.

I don't think I have any US readers who are currently overseas, or indeed any US readers at all, but just in case: register online for overseas/absentee ballot.

Comments

[ergotia.livejournal.com]

Are you serious?

[ergotia.livejournal.com]

See my posts in response to beingjdc, and you could try Amnesty International's website. In any event Juliet's original post is about people who in the majority of case in London at least will be Black UK citizens or visitors here entirely legal being stopped and questioned on the basis of skin colour alone - do you not think that is a human rights issue?

[beingjdc.livejournal.com]

That isn't actually the question, the question would be whether there's a higher probability of someone non-white than white being an illegal immigrant. The answer might well be the same. To judge it, dunno, is it ageist or discriminatory against young-looking people that the truancy squad have the right to stop people who look like they are of school age and ask why they aren't in school?

[kitty-goth.livejournal.com]

I dunno, ask Marna.

[beingjdc.livejournal.com]

That's who I was thinking of. I suppose if it is a problem they could just stop a certain quota of pensioners, just in case.

[kitty-goth.livejournal.com]

Chavs are more likely to take drugs, and to take them in such a way that they are likely to cause a nuisance to society.

Does that justify the extreme step of just rounding up Burberry and forcibly blood-testing them?

[lilithmagna.livejournal.com]

Simply because something is lawful, or unlawful, doesnot mean that it is right or wrong. Apartheid was lawful in its day, and the activities of the ANC were illegal. Rosa Parkes broke the law by riding in the white portuion of the bus. What do you think you mean by this phrase? See also my comments below.

[lilithmagna.livejournal.com]

Have you actually read any of this discussion?

Apartheid was once legal - those who resisted it were jailed for many years. This is an illustration of the difficulties with a simplistic unlawful = wrong attitude. And as the discussion makes plain at many points, persons from abroad who have reached the end of the appeals process are "sent home" (often to almost certain death) - what sparked this discussion was whether they should starve in the streets while dying of cancer while waiting to be removed.

Do you have any actual figures for this "influx" of "illegal immigrants" (sic) or are you just quoting the Daily Mail?

[lilithmagna.livejournal.com]

I am neither liberal nor blinkered, but clearly there is no arguing with you, as you cannot be bothered to listen but prefer to react to what you think is being said and respond with second hand invective - presumably you saw me object to being called a liberal elsewhere inthis thread and seized the opportunity to do some more non - thinking.

[lilithmagna.livejournal.com]

You don't appear to understand what an illegal immigrant is so your opinion is "blinkered" by your ignorance. Just a question; do you have a swastika on the US flag as your logo because you believe that the US is a fascist state, or because you think it should be?

[ergotia.livejournal.com]

But surely as a troll you must have the last word?

[ergotia.livejournal.com]

I cant believe you fell for that - trolls require the last word, you went for the last word, therefore....