Comments for en-gb 30 Wed 27 May 2015 08:40:16 GMT+1 A feed of user comments from the page found at dennisjunior1 Gavin Hewitt:Thanks for the important story about migration to the Mainland of Europe...And, its effects on the immigration of immigrants...~Dennis Junior~ Wed 21 Oct 2009 02:21:48 GMT+1 ikamaskeip JorgeG1 and #49.Many intriguing points raised by you: Only spoilt by your regular soapbox routine 'bash Little England'. All the same some of it even made sense.Of course, you were a bit disingenuous, you know full well Spain has attracted those 5,220,577 Immigrants between 2002 and 2008, by its Government's deliberate Immigration Policy.I mean you haven't forgotten have you Spain's "Unilateral Amnesty" for Illegal Immigrants in 2005? An amnesty-policy that even the EU in Brussels had the good sense to warn against!So, you end up with 4,192,835 officially registered Immigrants who can claim all sorts of benefits and entitlements, and yet, another 1,000,000+ who are still considered 'Illegal Immigrants'.Naturally, Spain's Government did not do this out of pure altruism: The mass of Immigrants were the frontline cheap labour for the huge Spanish building boom of this decade and very effective they were too.Only trouble is now the Economic crash has come about the Spanish building trade has almost died and the largest number of Unemployment Benefit claimants are those recent Immigrants! This coupled to Spain's highest Unemployment of all the 'west' EU Nations has rather damaged the image of Spain.However, unfortunately for the Spanish, not enough to put off the 'illegal immigrants' who are still arriving by the boatload on a near daily basis!Despite Spain's largesse this 'immigration' has not been without its problems: E.g. Spanish Gypsies battling African immigrants and Spanish Teens and youths fighting Latin American immigrants! Well, what's a few lost teeth and hospital treatments in the cause of multi-cultural Spain!?And so we have Spain's population going from 40million to 46million between 2000 and Jan. 2008, and Spain second only to the USA for number of Immigrants in that same period.So, I can only concur, it is that 'Special Relationship' Spain most clearly has with prospective Immigrants to the EU: Now, as Spain is so obliging could it not consider taking a good number of Immigrants from the UK where clearly there is not the same 'relationship' and afterall, it would be in the best interests of all concerned if they went somewhere they are so obviously made welcome.Lest the UK neglects to say it: Thank you so much big, big, big Spain! Fri 16 Oct 2009 16:39:12 GMT+1 Leo_Naphta MA, you're silly. Two political murders are not the same as a full fledged 'war'. Fortuyn was killed by a radical animal rights activist, by the way, not a Muslim. Even if his views on Islam factored into Van Der Graaf's decision to assassinate him, it's not an episode in a religious conflict. Theo Van Gogh was killed by an Islamic terrorist, but not as an act of war by Dutch Muslims against the Non-Muslims... Seems like you're the one that can't seperate individual from collective responsibility. Careful, before you know it you it, you'll be out lynching anyone with a Middle Eastern appearance, come the next terror attack on American soil. Fri 16 Oct 2009 06:28:52 GMT+1 PlanetEnglish Migration is a basic human need.All of us migrate - from small villages to bigger towns, from small towns to Capital Cities, etcWhen National boundaries are created and need to be crossed - in the pursuit of a basic human need, we get into this hysterical debate on Immigration.We should not forget that Britons migrated in millions to America, Canada, Australia - and that exercise over 300 years created one of the biggest growth stories in World Economics that mankind has ever known. The one religion that enabled this to happen is actually not a religion but a language called ENGLISH.To bring religion and race into a debate on Migration does not even attempt to understand that Migration is a basic human need that has been one of the biggest motors for economic growth.It may appear ironinc to note that during the 300 years that saw the successful economic emergence of Planet English, a billion people of Undivided India were a crucial constituent of the 'Empire' - and neither their religion nor their race prevented them from contributing to this successful emergence.I would like to believe that Migration is a basic human need - and as nations and civilizations learn to tap the energies of migration, they too will be successful. Diverting the debate towards race and religion tends to look at migration negatively, not positively. Fri 16 Oct 2009 03:03:39 GMT+1 David Globalization will fix everything...time heals all wounds...Who knew the age of democracy, a Chinese dictatorship should be the most successful of governments...Wait, opinion matters in this idea-I don't agree with the aboveso yes to Europe, and how is The EU a threat to democracy?I just don't get this controversy in face of true dictatorships elsewhere. (Russia seems torn between both ideas)Off topic, but perhaps people should try construct a place (like Europe) everyone wants to come to live in and work in, then they can complain... Fri 16 Oct 2009 00:04:09 GMT+1 annanan We should look at this from a humanitarian angle .The skilled workers should stay in their own countries where they are desperately needed. We should be deeply ashamed to employ doctors , nurses and scientists from developing countries .Our education system should be reorganised so kids shut up , face front and get taught .The desperate people who risk their lives should be helped. There are going to be an awful lot of displaced people if deserts keep spreading . We cannot let our brothers and sisters and their children , starve while we have, relitavely, plenty . These first ripples of immigrants may be our practice run . Longterm , the hot countries need to export energy - solar and wind ; and the cold countries , water . Maybe we all need to become migrants , following the temperatures at which we can live with the least expenditure of energy for heating or air conditioning . Have industries and factories where the land is barren , and grow crops where there is water . Thu 15 Oct 2009 21:24:15 GMT+1 MarcusAureliusII Napthalene #45;A debate in Holland. Guess Pim Fortuyn lost that debate...or did he? He certainly made his point even if it cost him his life. And then there's Theo van Gogh. He also lost the same debate...the same way. The pen may be mightier than the sword but the bullet seems more powerful yet. Thu 15 Oct 2009 20:11:08 GMT+1 GH1618 The country in question in posts #48 and #49 is probably Spain, which would explain why persons from Latin America might choose to go there in significant numbers. The US is becoming less hospitable to illegal aliens. Thu 15 Oct 2009 19:50:05 GMT+1 JorgeG @ SuperJulianR 36Very good post as usual except for this:"The ONLY way of controlling illegal immigration (or whatever you want to call it) is to make it less atractive to come here (housing, benefits, healthcare, jobs)."Sorry but you are slightly wrong here.The only way of controlling illegal immigration is when poverty in the world is eradicated and all the billions of human beings living in third world countries have the same standard of living as (most of) those living in wealthy countries. As this is unlikely to happen anytime soon, it seems to me that trying to control illegal immigration by erecting barriers (cf. the UK and the anti-immigration/anti-EU brigades under the cheerleading of their unelected tabloid bureaucrats) is as futile as trying to stop the world form turning.I happen to come from a Mediterranean country that has seen probably the largest wave of immigration (both legal and illegal) of any EU country in recent times, and that, according to the BBC, has "the highest proportion of immigrants of any EU country" and "In the past decade, five million foreign workers have arrived (….) - making up 10% of the population." notes for the anti-EU/anti-immigration brigades:The country that I am referring to (i.e. my country) has:1. No open borders policy apart from being a member of Schengen, something which has absolutely nothing to with the surge of immigration as the source of immigrants are all non-Schengen countries, in this order (more or less): Latin America and the Caribbean, North Africa, Romania, UK (yes, UK) and Sub-saharan Africa. (Note, Romania is not yet a Schengen country although expected to become one within three to five years.)2. It is not particularly 'attractive' for immigrants as it had/has the highest unemployment rate in the EU3. There are absolutely no automatic rights to housing, benefits or healthcare for anyone that is not paying NI contributions (or the equivalent) and has the equivalent of a NI card.4. The government has no specific policy of multiculturalismOf course, nothing of this applies to the UK as it has, according to the anti-immigration/anti-EU brigades and their unelected tabloid bureaucrats:1. "Open borders", just try to cross one and you will see (he-he, you are in for a big surprise!) It is not in Schengen, because of point one above but also because it is an 'island'. I wonder why nobody told Iceland, Cyprus and Malta that islands are not eligible to join Schengen.3. It is very attractive to migrants because they get freebies as soon as they cross the border4. etc.What I cannot understand is that, with the UK being the Mecca for all immigrants in the world, how come there is a lowly Mediterranean country that has "the highest proportion of immigrants of any EU country". Was that not supposed to be the UK?I supposed it’s like the 'Special Relationship'. Until Obama said that France was their oldest ally every one had swallowed raw the propaganda peddled by the unelected tabloid bureaucrats. Thu 15 Oct 2009 17:23:24 GMT+1 JorgeG "As long as we are imprisoned in the "EU" we should seek to destroy it from the inside. You shouldn't be surprised at that. You know we were promised a referendum which we have not had."It seems to me that you are as misguided as the jingoistic flag-wavers of UKIP. Perhaps what you would need to 'destroy from the inside' is your own parliament (notice to the moderators, this is not an incitement to terrorism!!!!, it's only figurative speak) as they are the ones that are denying you a referendum. That has got nothing to do with the EU itself or with me, as I am not even British, thank you very much. Thu 15 Oct 2009 16:51:03 GMT+1 john-In-Dublin # 33 MarcusAureliusII wrote:"Writing long winded tedious postings is one more way I can inflict some of Europe's own medicine on it."Well - at least he's honest. Thu 15 Oct 2009 12:02:42 GMT+1 joehoch I would agree with Freeborn-John about Mark Mardell being in the wrong places at times. The thornier issues should be looked at, as we are having in front of us now. However a free trade world as a solution is no solution. It causes havock, as indeed we have been and are experiencing presently. It requires a patient step by step approach. The EU haters should put their feelings aside for a bit and take a step back to look at things from a wider angle. We have expected far too much from the US over the years, we need the EU as a power structure for a long time to come. If the enormous and growing presence of China does not weigh as an argument with the sceptics than possibly nothing will. There are a lot of displaced people in the EU from the Balcan troubles in the nineties and there are Africans on their hazardous journee to Europe all the time. The solution to this is of course in Africa, but how to bring it about? Co-ordinated investment and not only the financial kind, should be the method. But this requires a very big effort that only a very strong power can provide. May be the reformed EU would be in a better position to make a lasting and effective contribution to this "our" problem. Thu 15 Oct 2009 09:52:22 GMT+1 Leo_Naphta MA, baby,ever heard of cognitive dissonance? That's what you suffer from. The fact that you've never heard of Joe Arpaio is hilarious, especially since he's not one of the Minutemen (although their existence doesn't exactly corroborate with your shining city on the hill story). Arpaio is an elected official, and has been for far too long. It's not a private but a government effort my friend.I never sead Bill Richardson isn't of Latino descent, I'm saying he's rich and white, he's not your ordinary Mestizo or Mulato. The fact that he was boasting about his Mexican roots is not unusual for a politician trying to get elected in New Mexico, but fact remains that only his grandmother on Mother's side was Mexican really.I'm not English btw, but thanks for playing. Did you know that social mobility is now higher in Europe than in the USA? I do like, by the way, how you try to counter my arguments by repeating them back to me. I never said that there aren't any Latinos getting anywhere in the USA, but pointing to the Attorney General makes me smile, as Holland, one of those places where, according to you, immigrants are eternal outcasts, have a Turkish descent Justice Minister, France used to have one that was Algerian-Moroccan descent, very poor upbringing too. If those Latinos you seem to know are so undistinguishable though, how is ity that you can cite their country of origin like that. Hell, I can't even tell them they aren't Latino, doesn't sound very integrated to me.Now, on to your examples of 'European racism':1. Spanish soccer fans:Yeah, you've used this several times. It doesn't happen at every soccer game, it doesn't even happen that often and it makes international news. Gee, I wonder why. Maybe you should think for a minute on who those people are.Counter: I've seen Borat, don't tell me the USA doesn't have people like this.2. Zinedine Zidane?I'm not even quite sure what you are referring to? Unless you actually believe what the Sun wrote about it. Materazzi referred to his sister as an uninhibited woman. That's indecent, but not racist. Rather weak example to begin with, no?3. Muslims aren't a race silly. They're a religion. Just like the art work of Jesus Christ in a vat of urine, wasn't racist against Christians, because they're is no Christian 'Race'. 4. Flemish and French? You can't even refer to the conflict properly? It's between the Flemish and the Walloons, or between the Dutch-speaking population and the French-speaking population. The Flemish aren't a race, and neither are the Walloons. Besides, foreign media are really bad at writing about this conflict, trust me. I'm 'Flemish' and I live in an overwhelmingly French speaking city (Bxl en Force). It's mostly a conflict about federalism and confederalism. Besides, just about every Flemish person can speak French, so you even got the basics of the conflict wrong there. 5. A war between Muslims and non-Muslims in Holland? In what fantasy world do you reside? Unless you call a debate a war? There's more of a war going on in the streets of Baltimore or L.A. then there is in Holland. (P.S., integration of Latino and African-American communities isn't going as good in L.A., or so I hear, ethnic gang-fighting is what they call it?). Thu 15 Oct 2009 09:22:06 GMT+1 JohaMe SuffolkBoy2 (42) Instead of pleasing the Chinese, Russians and Americans by destroying the EU from the inside out, Britain, being one of the major member states, could also try to gain influence within that organization. The problem with opting out of as much things as possible is mainly a decrease in influence, which is basically shooting yourself in the foot. Thu 15 Oct 2009 08:47:40 GMT+1 JohaMe Freeborn-John (24) The main problem with the Lisbon Treaty is that there are no new backgrounds to report: everything that could be written at the moment has been written, a million times over. Even the British license payer gets Tired of the Treaty.The British license payer would expect the BBC to report important foreign issues like mass migration on a part of their website dedicated to foreign news. Thu 15 Oct 2009 08:31:26 GMT+1 EUprisoner209456731 34. At 5:47pm on 14 Oct 2009, JorgeG1 wrote:' ...5. Finally, the secret wish of the Europhobes, that the EU folds and all countries go back to the post-war era with their 27 different currencies and individual picket fences is not going to happen. ..."My prime concern is not to be in the "EU". It isn't a secret wish. I make it very public, here and elsewhere.As long as we are imprisoned in the "EU" we should seek to destroy it from the inside. You shouldn't be surprised at that. You know we were promised a referendum which we have not had. So grow up and tell your fellow "EU"-lovers to give us the referendum we were promised, that we want and to which we are entitled.It could end up with the tanks of a European Army burning on the streets of England and your relatives could be inside them. That is not a wish on my part but a concern. Thu 15 Oct 2009 03:08:29 GMT+1 EUprisoner209456731 There are too many people on the earth now. There are too many people in the UK now. When you fly in to Stansted in the early dark and look at the lights below it is quite obvious that there are too many people in the South East of England at least. There are too many foreigners in the UK now. People are furious. The excessive immigration has presumably helped the BNP. More immigration could lead to an explosion of anger and violence which would be to the disadvantage of those immigrants already here.I am not in favour of throwing immigrants out except criminals. I am in favour of other countries throwing British criminals out and of British criminals being not allowed to leave the UK. However even more excessive immigration could lead to attacks on immigrants and of calls for all immigrants to be thrown out. The situation has already seriously impaired the relationship with Polish people. Many Poles have said to me "British people do not like Polish people." I do like Polish people.We must find another solution other than letting in more immigrants. Thu 15 Oct 2009 02:57:44 GMT+1 GH1618 ikamaskeip (#38) "However, I note your discrete silence on the English Computer-hacker and sense that you too (like me) looked up the relevant US Federal Law and found our poor misguided seeker after little green men is indeed facing charges that can end up as a lifetime behind bars!"Not true. I did look up the specific section of code cited in the indictment, and it says pretty much what is said in the indictment. (I use the Cornell website for this, by the way, which is the easiest to use, I find.)The fact that the charge may carry up to a 60-year or so sentence is beside the point. That is well known, which is why the figure is bandied about. My point is that, if he is extradited, tried, and convicted, he will be sentenced for what he is and what he did, and it will not be the maximum. If, as it seems, he is merely a kook and not a cyber-terrorist, he will be sentenced to much less than the maximum. I'm guessing six months to a year. Wed 14 Oct 2009 21:41:19 GMT+1 ikamaskeip JorgeG1 and #34.I notice you have developed another term which you apply to those of us in the UK who do not follow your lead and kiss the feet of the Brussels Pope Barroso: Apparently we are now "Little England". How quaint, how limitless is your abiding condescension of we unclean people for whom the brave new EU soap rhetoric has so inconveniently slipped through our grasp.The "devil incarnate"! Come now, not even Brussels deserves such an unhelpful epithet: No, I think the more prosaic Little Garden of Eden will suffice - - naturally, that is after Msr Barroso was tempted and ate the Apple of Democracy - - and all EUrocrats have since slithered upon the European mainland for nothing could be more lowly!"UK part of an EU Asylum and Immigration policy.."! Perish the thought: The UK along with all the EU Nations and Citizens is a victim of the ill-thought-out and often terribly inhumane EU Asylum and Immigration policy that has led to Economic exploitation of an under-class pool of millions of employees and to the trafficking and enslavement of thousands of innocent females and children. A situation that demonstrably did not exist when Nations had responsibility for their borders and security."EU countries should go back to the 80s"! Heavens, if only the EU had any aspiration to be that advanced: The European Union is a throwback to centuries old 'one-Europe-centralisers' with an outlook as modern as Augustus, Charlemagne, Napoleon... It has not reached past Joe Stalin's 1945 yet, so, there's no chance of anything as inspirationally breakthrough in Political theory as the 1980s!" matter how much you rant or lie.."! Come now, I know from your perspective everything looks very bleak and the negatives far outweigh the positives, but I promise you it is not as bad as it looks, really it isn't it.Why only yesterday Msr Barroso was telling us all about how the EU Citizen was at the forefront of his thoughts in everything he did....Oh, I see and hear what you mean! Wed 14 Oct 2009 21:40:50 GMT+1 ikamaskeip GH1618 and #35.Come on 'volunteers' was just getting into the idiom of the piece and not meant as the reality!That said, I readily concede the proof of the USA Extraditing a wanted felon after due process. Refreshing.However, I note your discrete silence on the English Computer-hacker and sense that you too (like me) looked up the relevant US Federal Law and found our poor misguided seeker after little green men is indeed facing charges that can end up as a lifetime behind bars!Truly sad for all concerned and especially the 'felon' and in some ways even more for the USA which not content with seeming to batter Nations near and far is now battering relatively harmless Individuals who have tweeked its sensitive Pentagon noses! Wed 14 Oct 2009 21:13:04 GMT+1 Mike Dixon Londoner in Spain First off - I, my wife and my daughter all permanently and legally resident in Spain are all migrants. My son who lives in Amsterdam and his Australian wife are also legal migrants. Marrying a citizen of an EU country entitle you to citizenship of that country. This also applies to marrying an American citizen as far as the United States is concerned.Secondly - This is an impossible problem to solve completely. The most effective is to make conditions in those parts of the world more liveable. It is no accident that most of the type of would be immigrants who finish up on the shores of Southern Europe come from the war zones of the Middle East or the none functional, conflict an drought ridden regions of Africa. These people have literally nothing.Some progress, particularly Morocco, has been made in North Africa by Spain and other EU countries. This is also a major aim for the Union for the Mediteranean. Wed 14 Oct 2009 18:50:29 GMT+1 SuperJulianR Freeborn-John @ 24The topic of illegal immigration into the EU is highly relevant, first because it affects the EU (Gavin's blog is after all entitled "Gavin Hewitt's Europe") - and like it or not the UK is a member state of the EU.Secondly, it is relevant because at least some of these immigrants will use landing in Greece, Malta or Italy as a staging post for illegal entry into the UK via France or the Republic of Ireland. The UK Government and much of the UK population clings to the deluded belief that opting out of Schengen means that they will be kept out of the UK and therefore 'not our problem'. Indeed, the justification the UK gave for the Schengen opt out was the UK's island status, presumably because Westminster and Whitehall mistakenly believe that the UK is an island, even though we have a land border!Lawful UK/EU travellers are being subjected to ever tighter controls when coming and going from the UK in a largely pointless attempt to keep the migrants out of the UK. If it becomes too difficult for them to smuggle themselves in in lorries, trains and ferries, or over the Irish/UK land border, they will of course take to boats to come over the Channel. Our coastline is far too long to police, and basically they only need to get across 40 km of water to get to Dover. Or they can get into the border free Common Travel Area by boat to the Channel Islands, there are no controls from there. Once all the high-tech wizardry of the dreadful E-BORDERS programme is in place, this article - and Schranzo's excellent post @ 30, show the future of immigration into the UK. I am surprised no one especially Free-born John can see this apparently - see the relevance now?The ONLY way of controlling illegal immigration (or whatever you want to call it) is to make it less atractive to come here (housing, benefits, healthcare, jobs). Wed 14 Oct 2009 17:16:26 GMT+1 GH1618 ikamaskeip (#12) "When the USA volunteers even 1 of its Citizens for trial anywhere in the UK/Europe/Iraq/Afghanistan etc. you may have a point!"Nobody volunteers to deliver someone for trial. An extradition request is required.The US does extradite its citizens, when proper under a treaty. Here is a case of a US citizen having been extradited to Lithuania: Wed 14 Oct 2009 16:53:39 GMT+1 JorgeG "It is hugely controversial, however, as it touches on the right of nations to determine who enters their territory."Sorry Gavin, but I think that you are stuck in this 19th century concept of sovereignty that they seem to teach in Oxbridge, judging by how well it has been learnt by the UK political elite. In the Schengen group of 25 nations, the countries that have agreed to form part of it have decided to move into the 21st century by pooling their sovereignty and creating a border union. That means they are not obsessing about "the(ir) right (as) nations to determine who enters their territory." It is not that they have given up on that right altogether but they have stopped obsessing about who enters their territory within a wider area (the Schengen area) that consists of around 6 or 7% of the total world population and, as I say, covers 25 sovereign European countries: Why do you think there are a few hundred Afghans camped in Calais (not in the 'Jungle' anymore but in the near vicinity) wanting to come to Britain? Do you think that the French government invited them? No, they are a tiny part of the millions of irregular migrants in the EU. And this particular tiny part of millions happen to want to come to Britain. They are in France because they can move freely within the Schengen area, just like those who eventually make it to Britain illegally (and they do, no matter how many walls Little England want to erect, e.g. by overstaying their visa, coming under false identities or just hidden inside lorries, etc) can move freely within the 5 nations that compose the UK and the ROI.Which leads me to the usual suspects in the Anti-EU brigade, e.g. IK at no. 2:Are you saying perhaps:1. That the EU, as the devil incarnate, is responsible for the problems of illegal immigration?2. That the UK is part of a common EU asylum and immigration policy?3. That EU countries that are in Schengen and the euro should go back to the eighties, where the UK is stuck?Well, kindly please explain:1. Why countries such as the US, Canada, Australia, etc. also struggle to control illegal immigration when they are not part of the EU?2. How is it that EU policies on asylum and immigration, i.e. what you refer as 'open borders' policy, affect the UK when the UK is the only EU country that has refused to remove its picket fences that separate it from the rest of the EU and has also opted-out of EU asylum and immigration policy altogether. Basically there are two key areas in the EU common asylum and immigration policy: The 'abolition of checks at internal borders and movement of persons' and the common visa policy (the Shengen visa). As the UK is not part of either of these how is it that it is affected by the asylum and immigration policies of the 'devil incarnate', i.e. the EU?3. If erecting barriers, i.e. going back to 27 sets of picket fences inside the EU, is going to solve the problem of illegal immigration why is it that there are open borders between the 4 countries that form the UK plus Ireland?4. I thought the EU was the EUSSR. I also thought that in the ex Soviet Union, people (and countries) wanted to get out, not in. So how is it that both people and countries actually want to get IN the new 'totalitarian superstate' that is the EU? Surely the Europhobes are not wanting to have their cake and eat it again, surely not…. 5. Finally, the secret wish of the Europhobes, that the EU folds and all countries go back to the post-war era with their 27 different currencies and individual picket fences is not going to happen. The UK may be stuck in the eighties and stubbornly refuses to evolve into the future. Fine by me, but you ain't going to make the countries that are in the EU proper (with Schengen and the euro) go back to the eighties. No matter how much you rant or lie. Wed 14 Oct 2009 16:47:49 GMT+1 MarcusAureliusII calamity jane;Writing long winded tedious postings is one more way I can inflict some of Europe's own medicine on it. It's revenge for all the boring long winded European novels I had to read in school. Ivanhoe and Silas Marner were two doozies. Wed 14 Oct 2009 16:42:30 GMT+1 GH1618 Reaper_of_Souls (#15) "What get's me is he committed the crimes while in Britain, as such why isn't he being tried in Britain?"Cyber crime is often international in character. This case is charged as a crime in the US because the security of a computer in the US was penetrated, in violation of US law. It doesn't matter (to the US) where the perpetrator was based.I don't know what you mean by "much vaunted security." The highest security military computer systems are on separate networks, and are not accessibile from the internet. The computer in this case was a lower-level system, much like ordinary computer systems everywhere. It is well known that security based only on passwords is readily easily penetrated, but such systems are ubiquitous, nevertheless."... those responsible for security should almost be grateful that the deficiencies have been highlighted in this way rather than exploited by potential cyber terrorists."That's what they all say. If someone picks the lock on my door, comes in, and takes some of my property, I am inclined to want the burglar prosecuted. The argument that he was merely alerting me to the weakness of my lock, and thereby preventing a more malicious burglar from coming in after him, does not impress me.By the way, I have been in the computer business for many years, and have never had any tolerance for shenanigans such as this.I am not interested in hearing about the PIRA terrorists in the US as having any bearing on this case, either. I never supported their cause, and the UK can have them as far as I am concerned, except that I understand that the extraditions were dropped under the Good Friday Agreement. Wed 14 Oct 2009 16:41:00 GMT+1 calmandhope Marcus seeing as you don't read such long winded tedious postings, why do you persist in writing them? Wed 14 Oct 2009 16:17:14 GMT+1 schranzo This is what happens on a nearly daily base around Malta. Wed 14 Oct 2009 15:54:15 GMT+1 MarcusAureliusII Napthalene;Actually sometimes I'd like to pretend all of you isn't there. I do not read every long winded tedious posting, I usually just skim over them and lose interest in ones I find pointless. Also, since I often answer several at a time, I only answer some points on each one I consider worth addressing. No I never heard of this guy. But considering that the INS has taken a dim view of the private effort by the Minutemen to indentify and turn over illegal aliens to authorities, I'd be surprised if this guy lasts long if he's for real. The government likes to maintain its monopoly on incarcerating people. When done by others, it's called kidnapping, even when the victims are in the US illegally and it is a felony. So you feel Bill Richardson is not of Latino descent? Funny, that was not the way he told it. In fact he was quite proud of it and his roots in Mexico. And now class becomes a factor too for you. How quintessentially English. How do you explain our latest appointed Supreme Court Justice Soto-Mayor or the recent Attorney General of the United States Gonzales? Living in the NYC metro area, most Latino-Americans I encounter have their ancestry in Puerto Rico. Would you like to say here publically that they are not Latino either? My next door neighbors for may years were from Cuba. They came to the US in 1958 with two small children and ten cents to their name. The husband became the President of the Hispanic MacDonalds owners of America Association and was very wealthy by the time I met him. Their children and grandchildren utterly indistinguishable from any other Americans. I could cite hundreds if not thousands I've met in my lifetime. OK, about Eurpean racism. Want to talk about the behavior of Spanish soccer fans making animal noises to taunt visiting African players during matches? Want to talk about why Zinedine Zidane was penalized and the French lost the soccer championship? How about the racist cartoons about Mohammed that came from Denmark, not the US? How about the war going on between Moslems and non Moslems in Holland. Or the fact that Flemish and French won't even learn each other's language in Belgium? Is Belgium even a country? I could go on with European discrimination over race, ethnicity, religion forever there are so many examples. New one on me, the government's reclassification of Protestent parochial schools in Ireland which may put them out of business and eliminate the possibility of Irish children of Protestant parentage having access to primary and secondary schools which teach among other things their religious values. Check the most recent broadcast of William Crawley's program from Belfast "Sunday Sequence" on BBC in NI for a full report. Wed 14 Oct 2009 14:16:36 GMT+1 Leo_Naphta MA, I wonder why you always only respond to one or two lines out of my posts and pretend the rest isn't there.Again, never heard of Joe Arpaio? You know, the one who jails illegal immigrants in the desert, in tent camps surrounded by barb wire? Who treats illegal immigration as a felony? Who keeps people in degrading conditions, for making a border crossing? Of course, Arizona isn't really the USA, is it? And of course, the USA does not have a sex industry which services prominent people by trafficking women. Bill Richardson is an hilarious example for you to give me. Really, the son of a citibank executive and from almost direct European Spanish descent doesn't strike you as 'Latino'? Of course not, he comes directly from a priviledged white, rich upper-class in Nicaragua. He's not a Mestizo or a Mulatto. Is that really the best you can do?You're just being obtuse, that's what you are. Look up who the mayor of Rotterdam is (Ahmed Aboutaleb, biggest European port, by the way). Or who Rachida Dati is ... (and of course, you keep forgetting that your favourite French president is of immigrant descent) No, keep living in stereotypes my friend. Oh, and I know a lot of Latinos in the USA, so don't try to tell me stories about it - a lot of them actually claims it's way more of a racially charged place than Europe-. My spouse is Latina, and not white either. Oh, and don't be silly, nobody can actually tell the place anybody comes from correctly by looking at them. Which is why everybody assumes that everybody with a darker skin colour is Moroccan over here, because they're simply the largest group. Of course, I'm hoping you'll respond to this with one of your three anecdotes. Anti-semitic German sausage sellers, Anti-German French college professors ... or will it be German Turks (Yes, we've all read I, Ali, but really, that book came out like 30 years ago, buy something new). Wed 14 Oct 2009 12:56:21 GMT+1 MarcusAureliusII Napthalene;"If you really think that in Europe every illegal immigrant is 'locked up and fined' you obviously have no clue as to how it works here."Of course not. The last thing for example that the Italian authorities want to do is to return trafficked "sex workers" lured from Eastern Europe on the promise of performing ordinary legal jobs even if they are illegally in a country themselves. Now who do you suppose are among the clients of these "sex workers" held as virtual captives anyway?Like it or not, it is a fact that migrants from everywhere including illegal migrants from Latin America and Asia are absorbed into the mainstream in the US but they are not in Europe. By the second generation, except by name, physical appearance, preference for certain foods, and very slight inflections of language, it is virtually impossible for one American to correctly guess what the ancestry of another American is and even then not always correctly. Had someone not told me, I would never have known for example that Governor Richardson of New Mexico who ran for President last fall was of Latino ancestry. In Europe they are outcasts no matter how many generations they've lived in a place because societies in European countries identify themselves by a shared history, shared culture, and a longstanding shared affinity to the land. American society only defines itself by shared values. That is different from most or all other countries, one reason for its overwhelming superiority over them. Anyone can become a full fledged American. Not so for those migrating to other countries. Just look at Turks in Germany, North Africans in France, Pakistanis in Britain. We are talking about illegal migrants here. I know the EU overty encourages internal migration...of people legally there. It is the encouragement of illegal migrants to move on to some other country that is covert. Why do you suppose France was so slow to close Saint Gatt or the Jungle? Do you think they wanted these people to remain in France?We are all well aware of the vulnerability of computers connected to networks to hacking with the goal of theft of data and of merely wrecking havoc. It is a serious problem for all societies, the more plugged into these systems, the more vulnerable they are and the greater the incentive for those who are looking for victims to target them. That is why the US is the number one victim of computer hackers. Pretending that the crime of hacking was merely to demonstrate to the victim how vulnerable he is, is an old excuse that never works with law enforcement or courts. Wed 14 Oct 2009 12:30:17 GMT+1 Freeborn John Freeman (25): You introduce global free trade so that Western companies can employ would-be migrants at home to make products that sell in the West. This would raise living standards in the poorest companies to the point at which the economic incentive to risk life and limb on a dangerous migration disappears. This can be done without an EU layer of bureaucracy on a never-ending mission to use every problem in the world as an excuse to justify an increase in its own power. Indeed by transferring the key economic functions of the EU to a global body (such as the WTO) charged with administering only a worldwide free trade zone we have an opportunity both to increase global living standards and to dismantle the self-aggrandizing undemocratic political union in Brussels. Wed 14 Oct 2009 12:02:01 GMT+1 Freeman "In that one slash of the knife they are no longer illegal immigrants who can be persuaded to return to Turkey; they are drowning people and have to be rescued. At that moment of rescue they enter Europe."What can we do with this type of desperation/drive? Even throwing them straight on a plane within hours of landing will only mean they try again. You have to stop them wanting to come. How do we do that? Police the world? Follow Nick Griffin's plan? Wed 14 Oct 2009 11:03:33 GMT+1 Freeborn John JohaMe (23): Not to the British audience that pays their TV licence to fund Gavin's trip to the Greek beach. The UK has an opt-out from EU immigration and asylum law and has used it to opt-out of all EU migration policy. Wed 14 Oct 2009 10:35:07 GMT+1 JohaMe #11, Freeborn-JohnWhether mass immigration is a greater or lesser problem than a Czech president making a show of signing the overhyped Lisbon Treaty is a matter of personal preference and taste. Wed 14 Oct 2009 09:59:04 GMT+1 Freeman Curse that errant comma... Wed 14 Oct 2009 09:41:11 GMT+1 Freeman Mass immigration results in the death of societies. It MAY evolve into a new, society or it may devolve into bloodshed. As this is a no-go area for all but the fringe politicians, which seems more likely? Wed 14 Oct 2009 09:31:31 GMT+1 Leo_Naphta MA, your post at 10 is again glaring with factual errors.First of all, ever hear of Joe Arpaio? Because it sounds like you haven't. Pot, kettle, black. If you really think that in Europe every illegal immigrant is 'locked up and fined' you obviously have no clue as to how it works here. Not to mention that immigration has not been standardized across the EU. Which is why a lot of immigrants for Holland come through Belgium, 'cause the rules are still slightely different. Europe has about as much problems integrating it's immigrants as the USA. Of course, I'm quite sure that you're unaware of the history of the USA in that area to begin with. Good luck with your Mexican community, they're about as integrated as the Arabs here. P.S. Where do you think somebody like Sarkozy comes from? Ethnic French?Ever heard of Elio Di Rupo? A gay, immigrant son and very succesful politician, one of the leading figures in our national politics actually. In Brussels we even have women with headscarves in our parliament. Wed 14 Oct 2009 08:55:19 GMT+1 calmandhope Lets just hope marcus that he isn't tried in texas, they don't have a good history with mentally ill folk do they. Good post though gavin, the problem with these illegals is going to keep happening no matter what deterrents we put up, the only way is to improve the standard of life and opportunity in their own country so they don't feel so desperate to get to ours. Slowly things in places are improving, however it is a slow battle. Wed 14 Oct 2009 08:46:16 GMT+1 ikamaskeip MAII and #14.Teeheee.....I know you are upset the incredibly clever, technically proficient, mind-bogglingly superior American High Tech Defence Systems computer got raided by a tiny, puny, and basically mentally challenged Englishman with the equivalent of an electronic tin-opener, but, there's no need to be vindictive...Teeheeeeeeee.........................Just rememeber everytime you come on here from now on boasting about all thigns American we can all just reply 'computer tin-opener' and ignore the rest of your silliness which seems to also run through the FBI! Wed 14 Oct 2009 07:52:53 GMT+1 David One time, when I was going on a trip with a friend to Wyoming, we stopped at a rest stop and saw a small car full of people who just looked casual, but were migrant workers on their way to some destination to be picked up for their work day (or wk). I do not know how that works, but to live in that twilight/dawn place where one would be hopefully hard to spot visually seems extremely strange and sad.Do these migrants take pride--of course--in their undocumented work, are they grateful, are they supported by their bosses gaining a small feeling of security?What a horribly insecure life..always on the edge of ..what? Humiliation and great disappointment?Compassion should have some role in the treatment of this "illegality." Wed 14 Oct 2009 07:46:49 GMT+1 EUprisoner209456731 116. At 09:16am on 13 Oct 2009, 116. At 09:16am on 13 Oct 2009, extremesense wrote:"#103 Suffolkboy2Have you been drinking..... a lot perhaps?"Water - a lot of water and too much coffee.It is standard procedure for "EU"-lovers to claim that opponents of the "EU" are in some way mentally deficient.Here are some other examples:dinosaurs, boys who didn't make prefect, BNP in blazers, stupid, Neanderthals and no doubt others that I have forgotten.Here are a couple from German websites: The Unteachables, they do it for a hobby.I think it says more about the minds of these "EU"-lovers than about their opponents. I think it is a reminder that we should not wish to be in their "EU". It underlines the fact that they cannot deal with people with whom they disagree in a civilised way and that they cannot construct something which it is worth being a part of. "extremesense " You fool yourself. Wed 14 Oct 2009 02:31:28 GMT+1 Reaper_of_Souls # 7. GH1618:What get's me is he committed the crimes while in Britain, as such why isn't he being tried in Britain?Some of this strikes me as attempting to placate the egos of US institutions that were damaged by their much vaunted security being so easily breached.Given that from what is being said massive damage to the system wasn't caused (no doubt much of the cost mentioned is to justify additional expenditure or relates to trying to block the access or track the perpetrator), those responsible for security should almost be grateful that the deficiencies have been highlighted in this way rather than exploited by potential cyber terrorists. Wed 14 Oct 2009 00:13:48 GMT+1 MarcusAureliusII ikea ship;"there is absolutely nothing to indicate from the U.S. authorities that they have any intention of dealing with this vulnerable British Citizen in a sane and sensible manner"Sensible would be if he is found guilty to put him in prison for a very long time and even maybe throw the key away as an example to others. Tue 13 Oct 2009 23:53:18 GMT+1 lullybeam ex turpi causaa tiny winged unicorn is looking at me. Her owner set off to the south of France as gas prices rose sharply just a year ago. I quite liked the sight of four elephants grazing on our communal lawn in November. Then the fogs settled and the tents disappeared.Years ago three lads travelled on a train from Paris to Stuttgart, seeking to meet relatives. They said they'd fled Serbia, they didn't wish to fight in a war. We talked about films and shared breakfast. Border controls approached and arrested the three men. In Albania, Northern Caucasus, Central Asia and recently China, the tracks were teeming with people desperate to seek out a 'better' life. In Berlin the road from Iran through Schoenefeld linked the East to the West, long before 1989. The route from Iraq via Greece seemed ancient. Babies, especially premature ones found safe havens in hospitals, but for how long? Sometimes fathers were deported.Whether passports for all babies throughout the world will provide an answer to pressing questions, I don't really know. But I doubt that Monsieur Barroso can tell the difference between an old and honourable Bartchakea with authentic inscriptions and modern seemingly golden replikas. Maybe we should ask a French anthropologist. She definitely should sit on any European panel before rash decisions are taken or implemented. Tue 13 Oct 2009 23:11:49 GMT+1 ikamaskeip GH1618 AND #7.He is charged with Espionage: Try looking at the U.S. Federal Law that is being used for the Extradition Treaty to apply - - the section he is charged under directly relates to "actions detrimental to the safety and security of the United States of America" - - if he were not then the Federal Bureau of Investigation could not have brought the charges to G.B.!YOy may think he wont receieve a 60 year sentence and you could be right - - it could be longer - - there is absolutely nothing to indicate from the U.S. authorities that they have any intention of dealing with this vulnerable British Citizen in a sane and sensible manner - - on the contrary, if the Americans had "accepted" his 'crime' was only proving that breeching a Federal Computer system that should never have been open to such hacking in the first place was all he did then he would indeed be "in BRITAIN" where he should be.When the USA volunteers even 1 of its Citizens for trial anywhere in the UK/Europe/Iraq/Afghanistan etc. you may have a point! Until then - - let's just have less of the glad-handing about the U.S. Legal system when it has the UK one in its pocket! Tue 13 Oct 2009 21:30:48 GMT+1 Freeborn John One of the main problems with Mark Mardell was his propensity to vacate his Brussels post whenever important issues were being discussed there to swan off at licence payer expense to some remote spot from where he would report on irrelevent side issues to distract public opinion from the key issues being decided back in Brussels. Gavin Hewitt seems to have got off to a good start in his new role, so it would be a shame to see more trips like this to Greek beaches at a time when when the Eu Commission president is making demands of the Czech republic. Tue 13 Oct 2009 21:25:43 GMT+1 MarcusAureliusII Tick, tick, tick, tick....If a foreigner enters a country without permission of the government then that person is an illegal alien. In the US it is not a felony but I understood that in the EU it is and can be punished by imprisonment and fines before deportation. When that was announced it aroused the anger of all of Latin America, every government virtually without exception denounced it. In the US we recognize the value and importance of these people to our economy and so we exploit them. Eventually they and their children who if born in the US are American citizens become fully assimilated and integrated into the mainstream of American society and culture. In Europe they don't. They and their descendants will remain isolated outcasts to one degree or another depending on which country they're in and where they're from virtully forever. As a result they have become a dangerous internal element that threatens the mainstream culture and security of the country. Unwilling to face it and deal with it, this has become part of what President Obama called Europe's ticking demographic time bomb. Tick, tick, tick, tick, tick.... Tue 13 Oct 2009 20:59:33 GMT+1 DiscoStu_d Re McKinnon, US Federal law has very tough sentences and I can't blame this poor fellow from trying every legal avenue. Better idea (in my opinion): keep McKinnon and send us Polanski.Re immigration (economic or otherwise) it's a tough situation involving human beings many of whom are legitimately trying to better their lot. I don't generally condone lawbreaking, but I will not blame these people for breaking immigration law. No place outside of Africa would be populated today if human beings didn't naturally want to migrate. Not sure if early homo-sapiens had their papers in order or not. Tue 13 Oct 2009 20:54:52 GMT+1 CComment Can someone please tell me why my comment at #4 has been referred to the Moderators ? I'm aware that topics like this attract excessive political correctness but I wasn't aware that my contribution was in any way politically incorrect. Tue 13 Oct 2009 19:33:45 GMT+1 GH1618 "Last week a British Citizen, born and bred in Britain of British parents who has a diagnosed mental disorder is refused leave to Appeal against a Deportation Order by the UK Government, that will see him sent in shackles to the USA for Trial on espionage charges that could result in his incarceration for the remainder of his life." (from ikamaskeip at #2)This is a red herring. McKinnon is being extradited, not deported. He is not charged with espionage, but with unauthorized access to a computer and intentionally causing damage thereby.McKinnon indictmentHe will not receive a 60-year sentence, if convicted, as has been bandied about. Americans don't want to look after him for the rest of his life. Had he accepted his fate when arrested, he would very likely be a free man today. Tue 13 Oct 2009 19:11:18 GMT+1 Reaper_of_Souls Economic migration should obviously be controlled and be at the discretion of the nation (or some would argue body of nations) accepting the migrants.Asylum and economic migration are often confused, and indeed can be part of the same case.Someone who feels forced to leave their homeland in search of security may well understandably seek as much of an improvement in their life from the upheaval as they can get. However, this can start to blur the line, if they could have been secure in a neighbouring country, did they need to travel to Europe to be safe? If not although they may have left their home country as a refugee, their reason for entering Europe may be more economic.Why should genuine asylum seekers look to enter a country illegally and not claim asylum at the first opportunity? Claiming asylum when caught would seem to undermine their case.Whilst people seeking to migrate in search of a better life is understandable, so is the right of a country and its citizens to decide who they want within its borders and using its resources.One thing is for certain the asylum and immigration system is a mess, excessively burdened by legal manoeuvring. Tue 13 Oct 2009 19:07:36 GMT+1 ikamaskeip willem86 and #1.Yes, let us not use the appropriate terminology for anything: Afterall, the Person seeking to enter a Nation from another Nation without any Legal Papers relating to Identity, Origin, Education, Health, Relations, Religion, Political affiliation, Occupation etc. well, they really are not 'Illegal' are they, they are just misguidedly lost in the system!?Please! It is all very well to be reasonable and apply decent standards of conduct to People who are basically seeking a better life for themselves, but, you must then apply the same codes-of-behaviour that are applicable to the Europe they are entering.Try to be a legitimate Citizen of any of the 28 European Union States without being able to produce evidence of some if not all the above and see how their State deals with the Citizen born and bred in it! Better still, try looking bat the standard label that is applied to those Citizens when they bend/break/twist/cisumvent.... the Law of the Land - - that's right, they are acting ILLEGALLY! Tue 13 Oct 2009 19:01:33 GMT+1 CComment This post has been Removed Tue 13 Oct 2009 18:50:26 GMT+1 frenchderek willem86 makes some useful points. Here in France such people are called "sans-papiers". However, the fact remains, they have not succeeded in gaining access to their EU country of choice via the recognised channels. As Gavin notes, they have resorted to intermediaries: those who make money from people-trafficking.The EU does not have a coherent immigration policy that works, is applied evenly by all "front-line" states, and is fully supported by other members. However, the fact is that these are "illegal". In other words, they have sought to bypass the "normal" procedures for entry into an EU country. And by paying for the services which help them to evade such procedures, they are promoting a further illegal activity - that of people-trafficking.Where such migrants are held to have a valid case for asylum, then, Yes - as Gavin says - there is a need for a sharing-out of the "burden". And, before any extremists start making exaggerated claims as to their own country's immigration problems, I ask you - please do some research (and No, I won't do it for you). Tue 13 Oct 2009 18:04:48 GMT+1 ikamaskeip We, meaning all European Union member Nations, are in a funny old World and it is getting odder by the day.Take the UK as an example: 1) Last week a British Citizen, born and bred in Britain of British parents who has a diagnosed mental disorder is refused leave to Appeal against a Deportation Order by the UK Government, that will see him sent in shackles to the USA for Trial on espionage charges that could result in his incarceration for the remainder of his life.This created an enormous stir, but, what seems to have eluded many of the opponents of the Extradition is that precisely the same Legal enforcible Deportation/Extradition Treaties apply across the entire European Union and the much maligned Lisbon Treaty reinforces this supra-National 'power of arrest' and 'detention'.2) This week that same UK Government is told by an International Court that it cannot Refuse Entry to a member of a Political Party from another European State (Netherlands) who holds extreme right-wing views that are patently unpopular with huge sections of British Citizens.The EU's 'Open Borders' Directives-Policy has enabled the mass movement and importation of 'Trafficked People' and many of those are under-age or extremely vulnerable: They are entitled to the full protection of the EU Police and Judicial services, but, it is the Open Borders that has led to this new form of 'Slavery' - - when I watch the EU Advertising campaign currently on SKY etc. about 'stopping slavery' I always reflect on the old adage "bolting the stable door after the horse has bolted!"3) In the same 2 weeks the identical UK Government concedes that on average over the last 9 months some 2,600 Illegal Immigrants have entered the British Isles each week (and that figure is those they 'think' they can be approximately accurate about) in addition to the 'legitimate' claims for Asylum by some 900 per week and 'Economic' Migrants at about 700 per week.The same International Court also has over-ruled the UK and other EU Member States in the name of Human Rights and obliged them to examine each 'illegal immigrants' cases and their right to 'access' legal-social services whilst their 'case' is under review. 4) Across the entire EU 'Open Borders' has allowed cross-Party-Political fertilisation of extremist ideas with branches in every Nation; with Illegal and Legal Immigration the figures rise and fall according to area, but the overall effect is an inbound wave of non-Europeans of whom the majority have no connection whatsoever with any aspect of European lifestyle-culture-heritage and simply seek to better their lot by 'hook' or by 'crook'. The UK opted out of the EU's Schengen border deals but it has made not a jot of difference and may have made it worse: Either way, the UK and the EU are tied into a spiralling Immigration-Human Rights-Trafficking nightmare in which the National 'interest' has been circumvented and usurped by the Federalist agenda of the EUrocrats who have laid out 'laws' and 'orders' that are not suitable to the States but to a pan-European entity which does not have to foot the bill or face the social-economic-legal consequences.It seems clear to me that the UK and the EU member States seem to have lost their Individual Right and Responsibility to safeguard their own Citizens and Borders has coincided with their signing of Maastricht, Nice and now Lisbon and thus enorsed the continued development of the Federalised European Union? A union that is demonstrably bad if the disjointed political-judicial-social shambles of EU Border-Immigration Policy is taken at its present level for effective and positive intervention for the UK and European National Citizens or even for the would-be Immigrants. Tue 13 Oct 2009 18:00:23 GMT+1 willem86 It might be interesting to look at some of the discourse used when discussing migration in Europe:Many organisations including the UN and the IOM refrain from using the term illegal because:-defining an individual or group as 'illegal' can be regarded as denying them their humanity and risks violating their innate right to recognition as a person before the law.-'illegal' has a connotation with criminality however irregular migrants are not criminals. Being in a country without the required papers is, in most countries not a criminal offense but an administrative infringement.-and finally labeling asylum seekers who may find themselves in an irregular situation as 'illegal' may further jeopardize their asylum claims as it encourages a political climate of intolerance towards those seeking asylum.While referring to migrants as ‘illegal’ has political and/or societal consequences, it fails to take into account the varying degrees of compliance which may apply to the situation of any one migrant. For example, a migrant may be legally resident but working in violation of some or all of the conditions of their visa.Therefore migrant rights organisations now prefer to use the term 'undocumented' or 'irregular' migrants. Tue 13 Oct 2009 17:37:21 GMT+1