London SE1 community website

90 Latino folk arrested at Coronet gig as police ask for I.D

Join in these discussions today! Log in or register.
Pages:  Previous1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Current: 3 of 7
Thursday 15 March 2012 1.34am
Pieces of Eight wrote:
With regard to the Coronet swoop, it is no different from police descending upon a rave because there is a strong possibility that they will find people selling/taking drugs. It is well known that there are many Latin american illegal immigrants currently in the U.K so it would make sense to target a gathering of this group to identify and deport those persons who should not be here (like Oscar in your original post)

On Sundays, there are many Latino folks in their local churches on Camberwell Rd and Old Kent Rd. The police could go there once a week and check everyone's visa status. They could also go to the local mosques to look for illegal immigrants there too.

Sorry, I know where you're coming from and it's different from my outlook. C'est la vie but it's just not the London I want to live in.
Thursday 15 March 2012 10.36am
It is also possible to look at this from another starting point: it's about respecting other people's rights to self-determination.

When human beings anywhere leave their home and cross borders, they are making a huge judgement. They believe that the environment which they are heading to (about which they do not have perfect knowledge, but sufficent to form an opinion) is preferable to the one which they start from (about which they have a high level of knowledge). We have to respect that judgement.

So any illegal immigrant to the U.K. has formed a judgement that coming here is a better bet than staying put (or indeed going anywhere else legally, or illegally). Good for them ! That may or may not seem a good choice to us, but it is the one that they have made and their self-determination has to be respected.

But implicit in that self-determination is the acceptance of the entire package (including lower-than-UK-minimum wages, risk of deportation, the English weather).

Let us not forget that this "package" has allowed the formation of a vibrant Latin American community in and around the Elephant, comprised of legal and illegal immigrants. A police round-up of a handful of illegal immigrants is, by definition, an occupational hazard for illegal immigrants.

The vast majority of these people have made a bold bet with their lives (pace some poor souls who may have been "trafficked"). We should be flattered that they have chosen to come to live with us, but we should not make extraordinary exemptions from our laws for them.

I can only believe that any Latino immigrant at the Elephant is far better informed than we SE1 Forum chatterers are about the suitability of the conditions in which they have chosen to live, relative to the other options available to them around the globe.

So I am not scandalised by the Police operating to enforce the law. I wish the Latino community every success, whether they came here legally or illegally - but always within the bounds of the law.
Thursday 15 March 2012 1.58pm
Gazzarc wrote:
Laws are made to protect the interests of the host country.
There are plenty of trade tariffs, import/export restrictions to control where organisations will economically be able to base their work force, designed to protect the host contries economy by restricting or encouraging the overseas inflow.

I'd suggest that laws are made to protect the interests of the ruling class of a country, rather than the abstract 'country'. Do you really think the laws are made to protect the mass of the population?

With respect to trade tarifs and import/export restrictions, the tendency across most economies for the last few decades has been to lower and abolish these (eg successive WTO rounds, some EU regulations, and numerous bilateral agreements).

Whereas the tendency with respect to movement of labour has been to build walls, and lock up and humiliate migrants.

While this is done, ordinary people are taught that people like them, who just want a better life for themselves and their family, are a bigger threat to them than the people who make the decisions about moving their work off-shore, reducing their rights at work and making them work ever harder for less.
Thursday 15 March 2012 4.14pm
Rambling Phil
Whereas the tendency with respect to movement of labour has been to build walls, and lock up and humiliate migrants.[/quote wrote:


You missed a very important word in there which significantly changes what you are saying....'illegal'.

Legal migrants are not locked up.

And with 2.6M unemployed and rising (source BBC News)are we happy for all and sundry to arrive on a whim and add to the problem?
Thursday 15 March 2012 5.25pm
People don't leave the place they live in, with friends, relatives, and a familiar culture to go to a strange country where they may not speak the language and are likely to be discriminated against 'on a whim'.

It's a massive undertaking that only the most determined will do.

You can see that from the people who continue to live in places in the UK where there's been no jobs for decades and won't even move a couple of hundred miles to find work.

Some of the unemployed in the UK are unemployed because business owners have chosen to move or create jobs in other countries (using the increased mobility of capital enabled by the first of the trends I described). Your fortress mentality (applied in the places to where the jobs have gone) prevents the UK's unemployed from following the work.

Are you sure that's really to everyone's benefit? Or is it only to the benefit of a part of society?
Thursday 15 March 2012 5.45pm
Gazzarc wrote:
Legal migrants are not locked up.

You've obviously never visited the hundreds of legal migrants who are locked up in the detention centre regime of the U.K at Harmondsworth, Colnbrook, Campsfield, Yarls Wood, Dungavel, Haslar and so on.

The Government's own figures for 2009-2010 show that the Home Office paid out 12 million pounds in 'special payments' including compensations and reparations made to hundreds of migrants who had arrived at the U.K border and been unlawfully detained or who once detained who been subjected to systematic abuse.

Shamik Dutta, a immigration lawyer said 'the callous and unlawful mistreatment of detainees is continuing, and is not just harming extremely vulnerable and damaged individuals but also costing the economy millions of pounds it is clear there is an epidemic of mistreatment leading to civil claims going through the courts."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/sep/26/compensation-migrants-locked-up-uk
Thursday 15 March 2012 10.14pm
Merlin Rouge wrote:
Gazzarc wrote:
Legal migrants are not locked up.

You've obviously never visited the hundreds of legal migrants who are locked up in the detention centre regime of the U.K at Harmondsworth, Colnbrook, Campsfield, Yarls Wood, Dungavel, Haslar and so on.

The Government's own figures for 2009-2010 show that the Home Office paid out 12 million pounds in 'special payments' including compensations and reparations made to hundreds of migrants who had arrived at the U.K border and been unlawfully detained or who once detained who been subjected to systematic abuse.

Shamik Dutta, a immigration lawyer said 'the callous and unlawful mistreatment of detainees is continuing, and is not just harming extremely vulnerable and damaged individuals but also costing the economy millions of pounds it is clear there is an epidemic of mistreatment leading to civil claims going through the courts."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/sep/26/compensation-migrants-locked-up-uk
Once again Merlin, the actual link you post does not correspond with your assertion. The report refers to Asylum Seekers who claim to have been mistreated whilst in detention. Asylum Seekers are neither legal or illegal immigrants until their status is determined. I find it odd that a court can award damages to somebody who has been detained whilst their claim of asylum is considered. If they were not detained then word would soon spread that you could wash up on Britain's shores, claim asylum, be released into the community and promptly disappear. The story of the chap who got damages because officials were "rude" to him made me chuckle. If we all claimed for every time a government employee was rude to us the nation would be bankrupt.
Coming back to the Coronet crowd, none of them were asylum seekers, but I guarantee that many of the illegals snared in that raid will concoct some nonsense that they will be at risk if they return to their homeland in order to delay their deportation and cost the taxpayer even more money in proving that their claim is spurious.
Thursday 15 March 2012 10.20pm
For whats it's worth , through my work I come into contact with illegals and people from countries within europe , the majority are here to find a better life but I have worked with many who have come here to escape their own countries law. There have been rapists,sex offenders and your regular criminal who have come here to avoid their countries law enforcers. The police have to do their job , damned if they do damned if they dont its the same for social workers.
Thursday 15 March 2012 10.36pm
I really hate threads like this one.
Thursday 15 March 2012 11.01pm
Boss St Bloke wrote:
I really hate threads like this one.

Me too. Certainly tit for tat as this is becoming is very boring fast.

Some people just don't like 'illegals' for many reasons. That also seems to cloud any sense of decency and desire for humane treatment to anyone who comes to this island.

I'll say no more.
Pages:  Previous1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Current: 3 of 7

To post a message, please log in or register..
Keep up with SE1 news

We have three email newsletters for you to choose from:

We are part of
Independent Community News Network
Email newsletter

For the latest local news and events direct to your inbox every Monday, you need our weekly email newsletter SE1 Direct.

7,000+ locals read it every week. Can you afford to miss out?

Read the latest issue before signing up

Also on the forum
Views expressed in this discussion forum are those of the contributors and may not reflect the editorial policy of this website. Please read our terms and conditions