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]

I am not advocating that they should receive benefits after removal from the UK! Why would you think that!?

[beingjdc.livejournal.com]

Because I am saying that they shouldn't get benefits after they have exhausted the appeals process, and you are saying

1) That I am wrong to advocate this removal of benefits
2) That they are removed when they have exhausted the appeals process

Clearly it's a long time since I studied logic, but it seems to me that these things can't hold simultaneously.

[ergotia.livejournal.com]

OK, I think your last sentence is too personal for this to continue here without entering flame war territory. This is a shame, because you dont come across as a knee jerk racist and I would have liked to continue a reasoned discussion. To deal with your immediate point however, I am advocating that "failed" asylum seekers should be supported during the time they remain in the UK while going through the appeals process as is reuired under international human rights law. I am not even saying that "failed" asylum seekers should not ultimately be removed, but my experience of the decision making process as a lawyer has caused me to have serious concerns about removal in the vasr majority of case.

[beingjdc.livejournal.com]

I'm at a loss to understand how pointing out that two things can't hold simultaneously is 'illogical' counts as personal. They would be illogical if I said them, if Juliet said them, if Tony Blair said them, or if Saddam Hussein said them, there's nothing personal in it. But never mind.

I am advocating that "failed" asylum seekers should be supported during the time they remain in the UK while going through the appeals process as is reuired under international human rights law

So am I, and as far as I'm aware so is the Government. My reading of their proposals comes second-hand I'm afraid, but I tend to rely on the Guardian/Observer not to be too generous to the Government on these issues, and they called the suggested change

"Home Office plans to withdraw benefits from those who had exhausted the appeals process"

So it seems we still agree.