Greetings!!!! ..... you are welcome to publish (partially or fully)
distribute, install on your website, link, forward by e-mail, and/or
translate this article freely. It would be appreciated if you would
notify us of any media or other publication of this and future
articles. Copies of any translations would also be welcome. Thanks.

E-mail [1] asylum_seekers_forum@gmx.net

********************************************************

Human rights and other irrelevancies:

a psychological overview of problems experienced by asylum-seekers.

**********************************************************************
*********

**********************************************************************
**

**********************************************************

****************************************

The author of this article has been a stateless asylum-seeker for over
20 years.

It's NOT a nightmare - it's a reality ...... living in a *soap opera*
scripted jointly by Kafka, Machiavelli, Dante, de Sade and Torquemada,
being inflicted on asylum-seekers by governments and judiciary ......
and those are the good days!

Most of the time - psychologically - it's a daily trauma of
survivorship in what can justifiably be called the atmosphere of an
open-air concentration-camp. It's soul-destroying and dehumanizing.

************************************************************

We arrive in a host country, usually after a vast amount of personal
trauma, uprooting and total disruption of our lives. Many of us have
been *only* psychologically abused and /or tortured; others have been
physically and psychologically abused and/or tortured.

In general, the present methods of reception and dealing with
asylum-seekers by the host-countries are Machiavellian, inhumane,
sadistic and medieval. For asylum-seekers it's a continuation of the
terror we have recently escaped - whatever the degree of that terror -
plus the new problems of adapting to a new life-system which induces
yet more insecurity and vulnerability, although of a different nature,
over an extended time period. This causes increased levels of
*Dissociative Disorder* and *Post Traumatic Stress Disorder*.

Host countries and aid organizations - due to their treatment of and
attitude to asylum-seekers - frequently cause far more traumas than
those originally undergone by us within our own countries and during
our escape.

We asylum-seekers need - very urgently, sometimes desperately - (even
if temporarily) a feeling of acceptance and safety. We also need to
find a creative outlet for our energies, (ie) work, in order to
re-find our self-worth, to help us integrate into the society of the
country of adoption, as well as to contribute to our own /our family's
and our adoptive country's psychological and economic well-being.
(Integration into a new society or country is always a difficult
matter, even for voluntary migrants and foreign workers). By denying
asylum-seekers our inalienable right to try to find work, by forcing
on us a situation of *non-status* and other humiliating denials of our
basic human-rights, only adds to the damage already inherent in our
situations. It appears that individuals have to comply with laws, but
governments do not.

If any economic and/or other help is given, it's given reluctantly and
in a manner which induces the feeling of rejection and *charity*, and
often also the insinuation that we are *guilty* because we are seeking
asylum.

It is a much saner policy - politically, economically and in
human-rights terms - to accept asylum-seekers by giving us,
IMMEDIATELY, permission to search for work, plus any other assistance
(such as providing psychological and physical healthcare, help in
finding adequate accommodation, language classes, job-training,
children's education, etc), to allow us to recover our health, our
self-worth, and our meaning in life, and to stop this deliberate
policy of marginalization, demonization, dehumanization and
criminalization of our status. It is unacceptable to be treated with
such deliberate callousness, or to be made into scapegoats for
political, racial, religious, xenophobic or other forms of abusive
discrimination.

From a purely logical perspective - apart from the human-rights issues
- it is in the best interests of the host countries to allow us
asylum-seekers to work, pay our taxes, integrate into society
(temporarily or permanently), and also so that we can continue - if
possible - in our trade or profession, so that we don't lose touch
with new learning experiences, /technology /other progressions in our
work-spheres, without which it later creates a situation where it is
always much more difficult to re-adapt /retrain and find work. This is
a win-win situation for all parties. Most refugees are capable of
supporting themselves and their families, and many of us could - at a
later stage - employ locals too. However, we are rejected, harassed
and not allowed to get on with restructuring our disrupted lives.

Under the current system, (and assuming that the host country does pay
anything, which many countries don't) the host-country wastes
tax-payers money by paying long-term social security benefits to
people who neither want nor need *charity*. We certainly do need
short-term help until we become self-supporting again, and we
certainly have the motivation and incentive to work extremely hard.
This would also reduce the stress we are under during the
administrative process of *normalizing* our situation in the host
country.

We as asylum-seekers have had the initiative and courage to escape
from our specific tragedies, and have endured a lot. Why should we be
denigrated and suffer collective-punishment under the deliberate and
malicious classifications and epithets assigned to us. We have the
right to be treated as law-abiding individuals on our own personal
merits. We are not a burden on any state; in fact, quite the reverse.
We are an asset, currently and for the future, and should be welcomed.

A large proportion of asylum-seekers will later choose to return to
their homelands when it's safe to do so. They want to be with their
families /friends /neighbors /in their own culture and language group.
Others are - by temperament - more internationalists, and adapt better
to their adopted country on a long-term or permanent basis.

All human beings, by nature, require healthy and creative outlets for
self-expression, otherwise the psychological effects are dangerous.
Loss of the will-to-live, of autonomy, of direction, of self-esteem,
thus inducing apathy, more psychological problems (apart from the ones
we have due to being asylum-seekers) physical ill-health, drug
/alcohol /other addictions, criminal or other antisocial behavior,
violence within the family group and/or externally, depression,
suicide. The list goes on .... and on ..... and on...........

*Administrative Silence*

In many countries there is a phenomenon known as *administrative
silence* .... (ie) the administration simply ignores visits, letters,
phone calls, faxes, e-mails, and all other known forms of
communication by members of the public /lawyers /anyone else. This
practice is used primarily against the citizens of the countries
concerned, not only against foreigners and asylum-seekers. Basically,
there is no concept of the fact that civil servants (whatever their
occupation or seniority) are employed by and are in the service of the
public. The public is NOT there to serve the administration. What
these individuals and/or governments are showing is outrageous
arrogance and contempt for their citizens and others. Everyone is
entitled to receive, and if necessary to demand, respect and courtesy
from government (and other) institutions and agencies, and from their
employees at an individual level.

Max Weber, the German sociologist of the 19^th century describing the
characteristics of burocracy, stated that *a clear separation of
personal and institutional interests gives a new meaning to the power
of silence and exclusion*. Since then, this attitude has been refined
and honed and abused by governments /institutions /etc. It's used as a
weapon against citizens and foreigners alike.

Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, the 19th-century French writer, stated
*Government is an unnecessary burden at best, and more likely a
tyrannical noose around its subjects' necks. To be governed is to be
at every operation, at every transaction, noted, registered, enrolled,
taxed, stamped, measured, numbered, assessed, licensed, authorized,
admonished, forbidden, reformed, corrected, punished.*

For the terminology *administrative silence* read *psychoterror
tactics*

(ie) putting peoples lives on *hold*, to whatever degree and for
whatever length of time, whether due to inefficiency /negligence /a
deliberate policy of stalling /inattention to the matter /sheer
bloody-mindedness, or for any other *reason*.

I consider that this tactic falls under the heading of *a major abuse
of fundamental human rights*.

For example, in several countries the law offers a so-called *remedy*
in cases of *administrative silence*. Apparently, if a request
submitted to the administration is not resolved within three months,
then the applicant may consider that their request has been rejected
and such party may then bring the matter before the administrative
court. If one attempted this method, no doubt[ ]the representative of
the government would then merely try to justify the non-resolution of
one's claim, while - by doing nothing - the applicant still hopes that
their request or cause will be accepted and resolved, eventually,
maybe, by the administration. This is no *remedy* at all - it's a sick
joke.

I consider that the concept and the application of *administrative
silence* is diametrically opposed to the concept of *presumption of
innocence* and *the right to a fair and swift resolution of issues*.
My premise is that specific legislation needs to be brought in to
outlaw *administrative silence*, and that it's the administration's
duty and obligation to resolve the issues, to reply to the public -
with precise details - and that if they don't do so then the applicant
or subject of the issue WINS the case by default after a period of 2
to 6 months, different categories of administrative processes having
different timetables within that framework; NOT that the
administration has the right to subject their employers (the public)
to *power-games*. This is the brutal and sadistic *Catch 22* principle
of abuse of power and *assumption of guilt* tactic, where the
administration plays with the dice always loaded in their own favor
because of intra- as well as inter-office politics, fears of making a
decision, plus the arrogance of power /etc. Each of these play their
part in delaying - or denying - resolutions and/or justice.

It's the administration - if they insist on fighting a *default*
situation of their own making - which should then bring their lost
case or cause to the administrative court and explain why they didn't
comply with the legal timetable or pertinent laws.

I consider that it is a fundamental human right for everyone - not
only asylum-seekers - to be informed by the administration what is
happening regarding our specific situation. We are entitled to know,
step by step, what correspondence or other communication has been
entered into by the administration in respect of our *case* or *cause*
or application. We are also entitled to receive copies from the
administrations of all communications in respect of our lives and to
be kept updated on a regular basis, in detail.

Governments - obviously - have the right of discrimination and
selection as to whom they receive in their countries, and non-citizens
(foreign workers, visitors, asylum-seekers, etc.) have the right to
know how their applications are faring, and to a speedy resolution. We
also have the right to appeal to the relevant courts of justice in the
case of non-acceptance of our legitimate applications.

It's overdue that all governments, justice departments, the UN, NGO's
and aid organizations were educated to accept the fact that *the right
to life* takes precedence over all and any laws, and the refusal or
negation of this right can arguably be classified as a crime against
humanity.

In fact, any form of negation of *the right to life* is - implicitly
and explicitly - a death sentence.

In far too many countries, too many lawyers, judges, and others in the
legal professions are likely to be pressurized by their government to
ignore human rights laws in the name of political expediency. The
other part of this crime is that too many of these people - as
individuals, and also as part of a group and a system supposedly
*dedicated* to upholding, enforcing and strengthening the rule of law
- comply with politicians wishes, rather than being independent and
ensuring that human rights laws prevail, despite the politicians and
despite politics. For those who fall into the above-mentioned
category, this is abject cowardice; an abdication of personal and
collective responsibility within that profession; contempt for the
inherent meaning of the law and of the principles of justice; contempt
for the spirit of the law and of justice; and the grossest contempt
for and of life itself.

Are asylum-seekers invited to speak at conferences or lectures
organized by governments, lawyers, the judiciary, UN, NGO's and other
refugee-aid organizations?

How many asylum-seekers (or ex-asylum-seekers) are employed directly
or indirectly (or as consultants, for example) by any of the
governments, lawyers, judiciary, UN, NGO's and other refugee-aid
organizations?

It appears that governments, lawyers, the judiciary, UN, NGO's and
other refugee-aid organizations base their actions - or non-actions -
on maintaining and accepting the status quo and the inhumane laws
presently in force, instead of challenging the basic premises,
concepts, amorality and barbaric realities of the ways in which
asylum-seekers are viewed and treated? Surely a more constructive way
to deal with this situation is to IMPROVE attitudes /conditions /laws?

The obligations, duties and responsibilities of the UN, NGO's and
other organizations dealing with asylum-seekers are to and in behalf
of the asylum-seekers, and NOT to the political and/or other agendas
of governments and/or other institutions.

I consider that the basic problem stems from the misconception of the
plight of asylum-seekers by many individuals within governmental
departments, the judiciary and refugee-aid organizations. as well as
by the unfavorable image about us which has been deliberately created
by political and media spin-doctors. The rhetoric is always that
asylum-seekers are the problem. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I
don't know of ANY war, ANYWHERE, at ANY TIME which has been created by
asylum-seekers. Apart from natural disasters, ALL wars, and thus
asylum-seekers, are created by governments, and it's asylum-seekers as
victims who are blamed - and then further victimized by governments -
for being in that situation!

The terms asylum-seekers', refugees' and illegal immigrants' have now
become epithets, and I think that the UN, aid agencies and all others
dealing with asylum-seekers should change their terms of reference in
order to counter the disgusting political and media
propaganda-machines which attempt to demonize and criminalize us for
their own twisted political and anti-social agendas.

It's far too easy to dismissively and contemptuously refer to us as
..... Oh, those bloody refugees'.

If we were referred to as human beings begging for a safe haven due to
their fear of being murdered' or similar phrasing, it would make a
great deal of difference to the understanding - and of the concept -
of our situation by governments, judiciary, aid agencies and by the
general public.

Most governments and organizations dealing with asylum-seekers -
(including the UNHCR) - operate under their own specific and separate
political agendas, which have very little to do with observing human
rights and the many Conventions and laws relating to these rights.

What are the goals /objectives of current government policies and laws
which have been promulgated against asylum-seekers?

Why punitive methods instead of rehabilitation?

Why do governments and judiciary choose conflict, coercion, imposition
and terrorism instead of co-operation, dialog, inter-dependency,
common-cause for compromise (equal benefit) and by sharing
responsibility?

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

"As state capitalism developed into the modern era, economic,
political and ideological systems have increasingly been taken over by
vast institutions of private tyranny that are about as close to the
totalitarian ideal as any that humans have so far constructed. "Within
the corporation," political economist Robert Brady wrote half a
century ago, "all policies emanate from the control above. In the
union of this power to determine policy with the execution thereof,
all authority necessarily proceeds from the top to the bottom and all
responsibility from the bottom to the top. This is, of course, the
inverse of 'democratic' control; it follows the structural conditions
of dictatorial power." - Noam Chomsky

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

What happened to the concept and practice of everyone - including
asylum-seekers - having the right to a fair trial, and that they are
innocent until proven guilty by an unbiased, apolitical court of
justice? The current practices are a perversion and corruption of
democracy, law, justice and humanitarian solidarity.

Since national and international human rights are supposed to protect
individuals and groups against governmental abuses, governments cannot
determine for themselves if and when they apply. It's like asking the
wolves to protect the goats! One cannot speak about the protection of
human rights with credibility when one is confronted with the lack of
consistency and courage displayed by the international community and
its so-called leaders.

When governments and judiciary - especially those of the USA, European
and all other so-called civilized, free and democratic countries - set
an example of justice in practice within their own societies, then
maybe they will be deemed to have some legitimacy and credibility when
they talk about `JUSTICE'.

Until each government indicts and brings to trial - in legitimate
international courts of justice - those of their own leaders and their
henchmen who were /are allegedly involved in crimes against humanity,
war crimes, state-terrorism, etc., their moral high-ground stance is
buried well below ground-zero'.

**********************************************************************
*******

Governments, the judiciary, institutions and other authoritarian
bodies do not act cynically. They act with inhumane, calculated,
cold-blooded, ruthless, amoral, deliberate opportunism and malicious,
contemptuous forethought.

This is one of the principle reasons why people - who are usually not
devout masochists wishing to be cannon-fodder for the glory of their
leaders' personal and national ambitions and political agendas -
become refugees and asylum-seekers.

**********************************************************************
*********

Vast numbers of the present members of many governments and
humanitarian agencies - plus other citizens of their countries
(including the Italian-born king of Spain and various other members of
royal families throughout Europe) - were given assistance and asylum
by other countries at various times in very recent history. These
selfsame individuals - many of whom are now in power in their own
countries or within aid organizations - treat current-day refugees in
their countries despicably and brutally. Why?

When governments - especially those in the wealthier countries of the
world - claim that their processes take so long (be they court-cases
or other administrative matters) because *the system is overloaded*,
and /or *we are understaffed* , and /or any other *reasons* - let's be
very clear that this is not a *lack of political will* or any vague
excuse - it's a very specific and deliberate action by that government
to withhold funding and other resources from those projects. This is
not avoiding - but evading and obfuscating - the real questions and
issues. The reality is that it's control and manipulation by the state
in favor of the incumbents in power, certainly not in favor of or in
behalf of the citizens who elected them and pay their salaries, and to
whom they are accountable.

This means that refugees exist for years and years with no legal work
permit, with no financial assistance whatsoever, no medical or dental
treatment ....only harassment, obstruction and belligerancy from the
governmental and non-governmental organizations where the
administrations don't allow us to comply with laws' by deliberately
stipulating conditions which are almost impossible to meet, plus the
stress and danger of possible arrest every day (or night) because we
are without legal papers. Despite the deliberate power-game of
withholding documents and other so-called legal instruments' or
permissions', we still survive in spite of the administrations
....although greatly inconvenienced, prejudiced and tyrannized.

Basically, we don't need ID cards as we know who we are. If the
administration insists that we have one then it's up to them to give
it to us. THEY are the ones not complying with the laws. We don't need
anyone's permission' to have our human rights, nor is anyone empowered
to grant or withhold these rights; they are innate.

Overall, there is political, legal and judicial connivance in making
and enforcing barbaric, brutal, illegal, immoral, amoral and unjust
laws', all of which is a fraud on citizens and residents. It is due to
an almost complete lack of integrity of the institutions of justice
and of government which employ and sanctify the actions of far too
many individuals who do not act in behalf of - but act against - the
freedoms and rights of their employers (ie) the citizens and
taxpayers. This is treason in its lowest form, is diametrically
opposed to the principles of good governance, and is an abuse of
trust.

What happened to the duties, obligations and responsibilities of
governments and judiciary?

Where are their loyalties?

To humanity and to human beings?

To the citizens who elect and employ them?

To justice or to the law?

To freedom, liberty and the innate rights of mankind?

Or is it, as it appears in far too many cases, that individuals within
governments and judiciary are - or act as - perverted, intrusive and
totalitarian enemies of the citizens and residents of their countries
in order to protect their own personal images, masks, insecurities,
fears, power bases and prestige?

Or are these politically and judicially instigated and approved
methods of oppressing populations?

The judiciary and legal professions are accomplices of governments
which perpetuate injustice and violate the fundamentals and principles
of human rights, and which uphold the use of state-sanctioned
terrorism, physical or psychological, overt or covert.

What institution/s protect citizens and residents from this terrorism?

This is an outrageous abuse of power, the übermenschen-untermenschen
(masterrace-subhumans) syndrome inflicted by individuals within these
institutions who have (in their majority) lost their humanity, or have
willingly abdicated from it.

It's an outrage inflicted on the whole of humanity, including their
own personal humanity, and it appears that the terms honest
government' and legal justice' are oxymorons

"When grief turns to anger, when your rage is as useless as your
tears, when those in power become blind, deaf and dumb in your
presence, when the rest of the world has forgotten you, what are you
to do? Must you put away your anger, choke back your bitterness, and
cultivate patience, in the hope that justice will eventually prevail?
The ill and pain-wracked survivors wait for years. And what if the
very government that is supposed to protect you cynically manipulates
the law against you? What use then is the law, with all its
guarantees? Must you still obey it, while your opponents twist it to
whatever they please? If the law is useless, whispers despair, then
does it any longer matter if you go outside it? What else is left?"

"You can forgive the man who robs you, but you can't forgive the man
you rob. In his haggard features you read your indictment and this
makes his face so repulsive that you must keep it under your heels
where you cannot see it."

The complete castration of history goes hand in hand with the utter
negation of refugee existence, not to speak of refugee suffering. What
has accompanied the robbery of these ex-citizens is the denial that it
ever took place, or better yet, the denial that the refugee even
exists. And when this fails, it is admitted that robbery has indeed
taken place, with the refugee as the culprit. Here we no longer have
robbery but rape: the total dehumanization and degradation of entire
groups of peoples, their histories, experiences, and stories of
suffering slandered and maligned. This is more than confiscation of
property, land, or home; it is the confiscation of the dignity and
humanity of the chief victims of modern colonialism and of wars. Let
us see then, in its entirety, the false framework in which the
refugees have been framed up, and burst it open at the seams.

This is despotism. "They treat us refugees with hostility and cruelty,
deprive us of our rights, offend us without cause, and even boast of
these deeds". Civilization has arrived.

These imperious beings, crazed by their absolute power and by the fear
of losing it, no longer remember clearly that they once belonged to
the race of mankind; they take themselves for a horsewhip or a gun;
they have come to believe that the domestication of the 'inferior
classes' will come about by the conditioning of their reflexes. But in
this they leave out of account the human memory and the ineffaceable
marks left upon it; and then, above all there is something which
perhaps they have never owned: we only become what we are by the
radical and deep-seated refusal of that which others have made of us.
The remarks more importantly reflect a deep-seated superiority and
racist attitude that permeates society, and play an important
psychological role in the dehumanization process. It would be inhuman
to detain, torture, shoot and beat fellow human beings, for the sight
of a fellow man in chains is appalling to the Western ethos. But once
humans are described in bestial terms - 'animalized' - then the
problem disappears; if it is discovered that the hands in chains are
in fact paws, that the cries of the tortured are only howls, then it
is safe to cease idle talk of human rights and attend to other
matters. Politics and power tend to dehumanize even the most civilized
individuals.who, in order to ease their consciences, get into the
habit of seeing the other individual as an animal, accustom themselves
to treating the other like an animal, and tend objectively to
transform themselves into animals. The utter brutality to which the
refugees are exposed, compounded by the most fantastic exercises in
denial and feigned ignorance by the governments, judiciary and others,
can only be explained in light of this deep and explosive dialectic.
It is in fact impossible for individuals or groups to appoint
themselves judge, jury and executioner of an entire group without
committing grave crimes. The key feature of anti-refugee sentiment is
its all-sidedness: every aspect of refugee life is made disorderly,
impossible, and chaotic by an injection of one or another element of
burocracy. No daily established routine of attending school, going to
work, or enjoying leisure time exists; in fact it in a sense it can be
said that the burocratic attitude imposes not disorder but a
tyrannical order, whereby the refugee is constantly trapped, tense,
waiting, and essentially imprisoned in a foreign land. The restriction
of movement is the most striking feature of refugee life. Endless
legal blockades and curfews enforce the paralysis. Refugees require
'freedom-of-movement permits' to travel. In order to move, one
requires permission: simply another way of reinforcing refugee
submission. All that remains to be done now is issue 'freedom-to-live'
permits, and no doubt they will be in short supply.

Governments, judiciary and other institutions are in the constant
process of committing one crime to absolve themselves of another.

But don't forget about those who support and carry out mass
deportation, another manifestation of institutional savagery. The
refugees' struggle for justice and freedom is in fact an indictment of
society itself. Those living under a dictatorship at least have the
distinct advantage of not being indirectly involved in the unjust
violence of their government. And what kind of violence are the
present `democratic and civilized' governments of the world exacting
upon refugees today? Our shudders are all for the 'horrors' of the
minor Terror, the momentary Terror, so to speak; whereas, what is the
horror of swift death by the ax compared with lifelong death from
hunger, cold, insult, cruelty, and heartbreak?....that unspeakably
bitter and awful terror which none of us has been taught to see in its
vastness or pity as it deserves

Liberation may have to be achieved not by brandishing this or that
document, but through genuine peaceful struggle and solidarity among
those who are being deprived of justice.

Long live the inquisition and the übermenschen!

********************************************************************

Detention centres, forced expulsion, and forced repatriation are
totally unacceptable.

Why are asylum-seekers forced to live in special centres?

Why should asylum-seekers live under such marginalized and humiliating
conditions?

This is - in essence - the administration and the judiciary taking
away freedom from traumatized people, who have already lost so many
freedoms, so that the administration and the judiciary may ..... or
may not, possibly, eventually, grant us some freedom.

Is this more Orwellian doublespeak of freedom from freedom'?

Gas-chambers are no longer fashionable, nor are they commercially
viable.

Why don't host-countries just reintroduce the guillotine?

This has multiple benefits:- It would save taxpayers having to foot
the bill for transportation and other expulsion costs. It could be the
base for a new entertainment industry which is beneficial to the local
economy. It's wholesome family entertainment, with reduced entrance
fees for children, and which at the same time educates the entire
population as to how we asylum-seekers should be viewed and treated.
It would also be a rare and wonderful display of honesty to show the
world openly what the local political and social agenda really is, so
that the citizens and the outside world can never again claim *we
didn't know what was happening*.

The end result for us asylum-seeker is the same - torture and /or
death.

Guillotining us would save us from these agonies, uncertainties,
terrors and stress, so this system for eliminating us could thus be
marketed by each host-country's government, media and civil population
as a *humane act*, so keeping their individual and collective
consciences clear.

This would give us the ultimate freedom ........ `freedom from Life'!

********************************************************************

What happened to the concept and practice of justice', where everyone
- including every asylum-seeker - is innocent until proven guilty by a
competent, independent and unbiased court of law?

The reality of the current situation is obvious, but I don't subscribe
to it! Isn't it time in *civilized* and *enlightened* Europe, USA,
Australia and elsewhere, to change these laws and this inhumane and
barbaric reality?

I feel obliged to record the problems encountered in the hope that
these matters may be rectified for the benefit of current and future
asylum-seekers. We are looking for constructive solutions to our
problems, and we need some assistance, not homilies. We don't expect
*perfection* in administrative systems, in laws or in individuals, but
we certainly require and demand a betterment of quality in all matters
discussed herein, from all the parties concerned.

All civil servants, at all levels, need to be educated to the fact
that their citizens generally - and in this particular instance
specifically, asylum-seekers - are not fighting AGAINST anything or
anyone; we're struggling - peacefully - FOR our innate human rights to
be recognized by so-called democratic and civilized governments and
judiciary.

That concept needs to be understood at a very profound level so that
the civilian, burocratic and political mind-set can change.

I think it is quite clear that this is not a document of criticism,
per se; it is an attempt to bring the state of affairs to the
attention of those who have the power - and especially to those who
have, primarily, the integrity, humanity and goodwill - to improve the
situation. .

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

From Eur-op news - issue 2/2000 Having Health in Mind

Mental diseases are often linked to unemployment, social exclusion,
homelessness or drug and alcohol abuse. Effective methods to prevent
mental problems need to become a more pressing issue within EU
policies. The Council has asked the Member States to collect relevant
data, to implement action promoting mental health and to stimulate
research. The Commission should incorporate activities on mental
health in the future action program for public health and implement an
EU health monitoring system. OJC 86,2000

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

In Europe and America they came for the Communists and I didn't speak
up because I wasn't a Communist. Then they came for the Roma,

and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Roma.
Then they came for the Jews,

and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for the
Negros,

and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Negro. Then they came for the
Asians

and I didn't speak up because I wasn't an Asian.

Then they came for the Arabs and the Muslims,

and I didn't speak up because I wasn't an Arab or a Muslim.

Then they came for the trade unionists,

and I didn't speak up because I wasn't in a union.

Then they came for the Catholics,

and I didn't speak up because I was a Protestant

Then they came for the asylum-seekers,

and I didn't speak up because I wasn't an asylum-seeker.

Then they came for me,

and by that time

no one was left to speak up

(with thanks to Pastor Martin Niemoller for the original version)

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
^^^^^^^

HUMAN RIGHTS?

Most European and other countries are signatories to the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights, as well as to various other international
treaties on Human Rights, but asylum-seekers (and other groups of
people) are - in practice - deliberately deprived of these rights.
Those of us applying for protection as refugees, stateless-persons, or
for other types of asylum, are allowed to be in the host country, but
are forbidden to work to maintain ourselves whilst the burocratic
machinations drag on. Not only are we not allowed to work; in many of
these countries we ourselves have to pay all costs of telephone calls,
photographs, stamps, and all other expenses of paperwork, including
translations into the official language of the country concerned, and
to cope with never-ending burocracy.

We need to work, but host states classify this as *illegal*. How are
refugees supposed to exist when neither work-permits nor financial
assistance are given from any quarter? Heavenly manna appears to be
off the menu at present! It would appear that we have only the right
to die of starvation under the benevolent auspices of all the
governmental and human rights organizations, which were allegedly set
up to assist asylum-seekers and others. Or perhaps special written
permission to die is required!? (Waiting for which permission under
the *administrative silence* game would involve an agonizingly slow
and brutal death. Or perhaps - in the name of political expediency -
this written permission to die of starvation would be expedited?!)

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights

This Declaration is just that, a declaration. It was envisaged that
national and international laws would be subject to this Declaration,
and that the signing of the Declaration by governments would therefore
be nationally and internationally legally binding.

However, because this is merely a Declaration, and because there is no
goodwill by governments and *justice*?? systems to enforce this either
nationally or internationally, it's absolutely worthless, apart from
being a decoration with colored ribbons and bow and pretty glittering
stars, just to be hung on the walls of signatory states to impress the
gullible with fine lying words. It's merely a camouflage - of
pretending to adhere to human rights - and thus a travesty of truth,
of justice, of the Declaration, and of everything else that the UN and
its component states are supposed to stand for.

The signatories to the UDHR are the self-same governments which have
the temerity, audacity and arrogance to squawk about the lack of human
rights in other countries!!!

###########################################

Below is a partial transcript of e-mails between the author and UNHCR.

So far there is not one person I've met in UN or NGO's in Africa, Asia
or Europe who has heard of this passport .... strange .... as they've
been issuing passports for 45 years under the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights I hope you have a black sense of humor! Some months ago
when I spoke to a UNHCR Head of Mission re this document, and after
some days of research on their part, the verbal response was

"UNHCR does not look favorably on this passport as it is not a
national document issued by a government".

My response for their consideration was "Does this statement imply
that UN in general - and UNHCR specifically - does not recognize the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights?"

The only reply I received to my question was from UNCHR Geneva
stating: "The World Service Authority with which I am acquainted has
no standing to issue passports under the UN Charter of Human Rights or
in relation to any international law or precedent given the reality
that States alone have this authority with certain exceptions made by
the States themselves. While this may not be believed to be the ideal
situation, issuance of documents without legal standing to persons who
truly need to have their legal status addressed and resolved has often
resulted in serious predicaments for the persons concerned. I'm afraid
we are often left trying to resolve the result. " - end quote

For further information on the UDHR and freedom issues see
[2]www.worldservice.org

The World Service Authority also issues passports and other
documentation to asylum-seekers!

*********************************************************

It is governments, therefore, which bear the responsibility for
forcing asylum-seekers - and others - to act in a so-called *illegal*
manner in order to sustain life. We have the right to eat, to shelter,
and to the basic necessities of life - whatever the legal systems have
to say about the matter. Are written legal words more important than
human life? Isn't the basis of democracy *the rule of the people by
the people for the people*? Elections are for the *appointment of
guardians* - citizens don't vote individuals and political parties
into power to be abused by them; governments should be acting as
guardian-administrators - not institutionalized and legalized
terrorists.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
^^^^^^^^

International Bills of Rights

"Let me add that a bill of rights is what the people are entitled to
against every government on earth, general or particular, and what no
just government would refuse, or rest on inference." --Thomas
Jefferson to James Madison, 20 December 1787

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
^^^^^^^^^^

The New Unhappy Lords

They have given us into the hand of new unhappy lords,

Lords without anger and honour, who dare not carry their swords.

They fight by shuffling papers; they have bright dead alien eyes;

They look at our labour and laughter as a tired man looks at flies.

And the load of their loveless pity is worse than the ancient wrongs,

Their doors are shut in the evening; and they know no songs.

GK Chesterton - "The Secret People"

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Robert Kennedy, South Africa 1966, in the most repressive days of
apartheid, at the University of Cape Town ..."It may seem futile to
challenge the world's misery and ignorance, injustice and violence,
but it is from numberless diverse acts of courage and belief that
human history is shaped. Each time a person stands up for an ideal, or
strikes out against injustice, he sends forth a tiny ripple of hope;
and crossing each other from a million different centers of energy and
daring, those ripples build a current which can sweep down the
mightiest walls of oppression."

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

"Too many vulnerable communities in too many regions of the world now
hesitate to look to the United Nations to assist them in their hour of
need. No amount of resolutions or statements can change this reality.
Only action can" Kofi Annan at the Millennium Summit in NY 2000

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

"Working at the edge of the development of human society is to work at
the brink of the unknown. Much of what is done will one day prove to
have been of little avail. That is no excuse for the failure to act on
accordance with our best understanding, in recognition of its limits,
but with faith in the ultimate result of the creative evolution in
which it is our privilege to cooperate." Dag Hammarskjold
Secretary-General of the United Nations, 1953-1961

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
^^^^

UNHCR

The UNHCR in Geneva has a department specifically *dedicated* ?? to
the affairs of stateless-persons. However, no UN offices, refugee
organizations, human-rights groups and other agencies which I've
contacted in Europe and elsewhere had any knowledge of this
department. I informed these organizations about this *secret* section
of UNHCR, and suggested that they pass this information on to other
organizations. I also suggested to UNHCR that their publicity
department should inform the world of the department's existence and
function. When I asked UNHCR for information about when said
department was formed - plus various other questions - they refused to
clarify. I also wrote twice to Mr. Ruud Lubbers by certified mail, as
well as to both Mr. Kofi Annan and Ms. Mary Robinson, regarding this
matter, but their offices haven't deigned to reply. Meanwhile, the
worldwide UNHCR offices and other organizations, because they have
apparently not been informed by UNHCR head office

(A) that the department exists and

(B) of the specific rights and the protection programs legally
available to stateless-persons

cannot carry-out their functions or give assistance or protection in
certain situations to stateless-persons, who are therefore deprived of
possibly life-saving help. About a year ago I was informed verbally by
officials at one office of UNHCR (outside Europe) that their legal
mandate did not cover the protection of stateless-persons, only
refugees. This is not only a lack of information, it appears to be
deliberate; a withholding of information, disinformation and
misinformation, by UNHCR Geneva.

There are also far too many personnel who abuse their positions within
the UN. For example, when I initially wrote to UNHCR Geneva asking for
protection, it took them over 2 years to reply. The UNHCR branch
office in the country where I was then staying refused assistance, and
deliberately misled me on many issues. This is the type of contempt
with which too many UNHCR employees treat asylum-seekers. Very many
other asylum-seekers - many of whom I have assisted with psychotherapy
- have recounted similar abuse by UNHCR personnel. At another time -
in another country - UNHCR personnel assisted me generously on a
person-to-person level, and complained that they could not legally do
more. This help was given willingly, despite the fact that - insofar
as they were (mis)informed by regional headquarters and/or by Geneva -
UNHCR could not, within their mandate as an organization, assist or
protect stateless-persons

The UNHCR, having just celebrated its 50th anniversary, has still not
managed to celebrate a workable international agreement on the
treatment of refugees and stateless-persons in terms of these peoples'
internment in refugee camps for long periods of time - several
generations of refugees - without the UN and/or all the world's
governments individually or collectively resolving the situation. One
asks; is it the political strategy of many powerful UN member-states
that generations of Palestinians and other nationalities should grow
up under horrific conditions of being malnourished (in terms of food,
education, creativity, work, self-worth, etc.), discontented,
oppressed, directionless, frustrated and explosive? Why have
individual countries in the world not financed better conditions
and/or offered permanent asylum?
The same question applies to other groups of refugees in Asia and
other areas of the world, although their incarceration has *only*
lasted for about 25 years.

Why - except as a short-term transit point - are refugees kept in
camps or other confined quarters, or, as in many countries (also in
Europe), jailed? Why are governments, NGO's and other aid agencies
actively creating, accepting, participating in and supporting this
form of ghetto-building, *detention-camp* style apartheid, and
deprivation of human rights?

This abuse of asylum-seekers by host countries could possibly be
prosecuted under the United Nations Declaration on the Protection of
All Persons from Being Subjected to Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman
or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.

How is it tenable that refugees - whether in refugee camps or not -
are forbidden to work? This is an outrageous human indignity, and
causes further problems as mentioned previously. This appears to be a
deliberate political strategy adopted almost universally by individual
countries. Why? Here are individuals who are already traumatized (it's
only the degree that differs) by whatever happened in their countries
of origin; many of them have lost family and friends, most of them
have lost all their material possessions; all of them have lost
(temporarily or permanently) their equilibrium, their orientation,
their perspective, their future prospects, their community cohesion,
their self-worth, their ............ We are then subjected to further
cruelty by the host country, both burocratically and on a more
personal level, depending on their host country's attitude and the
political and media manipulation towards foreigners, and especially
their attitude towards asylum-seekers. Here are people, some of whom
have never ventured beyond their villages in their home countries,
some who have never been beyond the frontiers of their home countries,
most of whom have no knowledge of other languages or cultures, being
subjected to more uncertainty and trauma. Why has the UNHCR and the
world community not resolved this repressive attitude? In countries
where refugees are in camps, why are they not allowed to work even
within this restricted zone?

Why do the UN and its member states - under whatever legal terminology
- not recognize as refugees or provide adequate protection and
assistance to those people who flee *non-state persecutions*, nor to
those who are classified as *displaced persons*?

The UNHCR (and the UN in general) - in my experience and opinion - is
incompetent and toothless in too many areas of its operations,
primarily because the individual governments which control and
manipulate the UN deliberately use this body as a scapegoat for
denying and escaping their own government's responsibilities. This is
not to negate the wonderful work that is actually accomplished by the
UN, despite and in spite of political interference and abuse by
contributing governments, as well as the UN's own internal politics.
It's the personnel - vast numbers of whom work with goodwill and
integrity - who actually get things done, despite the constrictions
and constraints.

Why does the UNHCR (as well as each of the UN divisions separately)
spend billions of dollars annually on self-publicity via movies,
full-color magazines and so on? The monies contributed by tax-payers
of each country to finance the UN are not donated to be wasted on UN
ego-enhancing propaganda campaigns; they're supposed to be spent for
humanitarian purposes. Why is the UN permitted to spend approximately
80% of its total budget on administration, self-publicity and
jet-setting? How much of the remaining 20% of this vast budget
actually gets through to the *ground level*, to the people who
desperately need the help? These people need food, medication,
education, hope, etc., not color magazines and movies to show them how
great the UN is - and most of these people will anyway never see
copies of the magazines or movies!. How many people world-wide suffer
and/or die needlessly because the UN's priorities are false, and their
allocated funds and other resources are abused? (I recommend the book
"Lords of Poverty" by Graham Hancock

regarding the above and other issues, a copy of which I was given by a
UN official.)

The UN is only a pawn to be abused by the power-lords who blackmail
and bribe the leaders of this organization as well as the cowardly
`leaders' of member-states of the UN into accepting their illegal
whims and wars, to ensure UN compliance, and to give `legitimacy' to
illegitimate actions. Is this a free and fair international forum, or
a hoax and a sick joke played on the tax-payers and others who support
the concept of an independent watchdog /ombudsman for the world's
long-suffering people?

The UN - as currently constituted - is a disgrace. It aught to be
aborted and restructured from the basement upwards. It needs to be
reconstituted under legitimate international law as a first priority,
in order for it to become a legitimate forum. This recent Nobel Peace
Prize that UN has been awarded is politically motivated. It's an
insult to humanity and a disgrace to the world.

The realistic need worldwide is for `pro-life' and humanistic
educational systems from kindergarten onwards ( and most especially
and specifically - starting as of NOW - within the world's
governments, judiciary, religious and other institutions, the UN, and
other humanitarian organizations) rather than the prevalent and
deliberate dogmatic `mis-education' within all societies.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

"Next the statesmen will invent cheap lies, putting the blame upon the
nation (OR THE GROUP)* that is attacked, (OR MARGINALIZED OR
UNWANTED)* and every man will be glad of those conscience-soothing
falsities, and will diligently study them, and refuse to examine any
refutations of them; and thus he will by and by convince himself that
the war (OR THE DELAYING OR REFUSAL OF HUMANITARIAN AID, ASYLUM OR ANY
OTHER ASSISTANCE TO ANYONE, ANYWHERE, and WHENEVER THAT HELP IS
NEEDED)* is just, and will thank God for the better sleep he enjoys
after this process of grotesque self-deception." Mark Twain, The
Mysterious Stranger, 1916, Ch. 9

* (ITEMS IN CAPITALS and BRACKETED are additions by the author of
THIS overview)

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

In Boswell's "Johnson" the story is told of a woman who was seen
frying live eels in hot grease in a large pan, on a street in 18th
century London. When the eels struggled up the side of the pan, trying
to get out, the woman would strike them with a stick, scolding them
angrily: "Down, wantons! Down!" The eels, it seemed, just didn't
understand their place in the higher scheme of things.

There's a lot of that in the way asylum-seekers (as well as local
citizens) are treated.

Welcome - now die 24 July 2001 - AFP

NIGERIA'S national Tae Kwan Do coach Yusuf Yahaya took ill on a South
African Airways flight and died after he was refused hospitalisation
in Johannesburg because he lacked an entry visa for South Africa.
After several hours of uncertainty, he was carried back aboard the
aircraft where he had a heart attack and died. An official, who spoke
on condition of anonymity, said that Yahaya had failed to declare his
health status before boarding the plane and that, as a result, "the
normal immigration laws have to apply." (and he wasn't even an
asylum-seeker!)

###################################################

"Everything I did, I did for my country." -- Pol Pot

This excuse was - and still is - also used by virtually every
politician, everywhere throughout the world. Unfortunately, most
citizens believe them, and participate willingly in the atrocities
promulgated by their leaders

Fighting the `Red Menace' (or any other categories demonized by
states, religious and other institutions at any other time) was/ is
patriotic. Supporting and financing mass murderers and criminals such
as Papa Doc, Baby Doc, the Shah of Iran, Marcos, the South African
apartheid regime, the IRA, Mobutu, Idi Amin, Franco of Spain, Salazar
of Portugal, the Greek military regime, Pinochet, Pol Pot, Saddam
Hussein, Suharto, the Taliban, many Latin American and other
dictators/ regimes, etc., in order to `prevent Communism taking over
those countries' (or for any other previous or current `reasons') was/
is also patriotic (and extremely good for business). All of the
aforementioned - plus a few other major murderers in our history - are
`merely juvenile delinquents' compared to the mayhem and devastation
caused by the majority of governments and institutions of today's
wealthier and/or more powerful states and/or religious and other
institutions.

What the so-called democratic and civilized governments alone spend on
their military and other murderous activities daily, is probably over
100.000 times the amount they spend on food, medical and other
humanitarian aid for the benefit of their own populations as well as
to help others worldwide.

The amounts of aid given for assisting refugees, displaced-persons and
asylum-seekers is miniscule compared with the profits made by the
donor countries from their international arms sales, which is part of
the cause of the problem in the first place.

Being seen to be donating is good for political propaganda, and for
the whitewashing of the realities for the gullible public at home and
abroad.

Stop inciting wars, stop bankrupting already poverty-stricken
countries, use positive help - financial and other - to build a new
infrastructure for each local society and economy, and people will
build their own lives at home. This also stops most people from
migrating or becoming asylum-seekers.

I think the question of why there are so many of us seeking asylum, as
well as the question of which countries bear most responsibility for
this state of affairs, has been answered. Also, that having caused the
problems, these same states complain that there are so many people
seeking refuge, and treat us asylum-seekers abominably.

"They won't have your names when you ride the big airplane. All they
will call you will be "DEPORTEES"." By Woody Guthrie

Any current or ex-dictator, politician, torturer, mass-murderer,
war-crimes suspect, trafficker in women, children, weapons, drugs,
etc., need not worry about asylum-seeking problems. Simply present
yourself in any country of the so-called `civilized' world - or any
other - show your cash or one of your laundered bank accounts, and no
one will ask what you do for a living. You are welcomed with open
arms.

Looking at the reality of migrants and refugees, there are those -
like Victor Hugo, Sigmund Freud, Salman Rushdie, Albert Einstein, and
many, many others who were humane and creative beings - unfortunately
there are also a micro-minority of individuals who were refugees or
migrants who turn out to be mass murderers and suchlike, and who give
refugees and immigrants a bad name ....such as Hitler, Kissinger,
Albright, etc.

Don't classify the rest of us with such despotic maniacs.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

On a personal level .....when someone crawls onto the steps of your
home, bleeding and in need of assistance and nourishment, do you kick
and otherwise abuse and interrogate this damaged person, then make
them wait and suffer further whilst you - the householder - ponder as
to whether you'll bother giving any help at all, or simply leave the
person there to die?

That is the treatment meted out to asylum-seekers by most governments.

We are human beings, not disembodied statistics.

The ongoing drama of refugees trying to reach safety in Australia is
no different to the way most governments operate. It's posturing and
manipulation for personal political gain and *prestige*??, using
innocent children, women and men as hostages, and is a tactic used by
most governments in varying degrees. The Australian regime,
additionally, forces asylum-seekers to live in concentration camps,
referred to publicly as detention centres' in order to whitewash this
outrageous treatment of vulnerable, already traumatized human beings.

These are basically the same *reasons* - admitted long after the
events in question (of course), the issues having been fully or
partially known by most governments - for deliberately supporting
and/or ignoring the realities of concentration camps, slaughters and
genocides in Belgian Congo, South West Africa, Nazi Germany, Cambodia,
Palestine, Indonesia, Rwanda, and many, many other countries. It's
political expediency. The national and international legal and
judicial apparati also (mostly) remain silent on human rights abuses.

The World's Most Unnecessary?? Protest -CANBERRA, Australia -

A 48-year-old Pakistani man was granted permanent residence in
Australia several years ago and has been trying to secure visas for
his family ever since. Not realizing that his case had been approved,
the man lit himself on fire in protest at the entrance to the
parliament building in Canberra. A witness said, "He was rolling
around on the ground...but he stopped moving by the time anybody went
out there with a fire extinguisher." The man was reportedly upset that
his family had yet to receive visas, but according to local papers,
the protest was unnecessary because the visas had already been okayed.
The man remains in critical condition in a burns unit at Sydney's
Concord Hospital.

This is an example of what happens when governments use
*administrative silence* tactics

Are politicians, government administrators and members of the
judiciary humane beings?

############################################################

But of course - in the political, judicial, financial and religious
arenas of intrigue and decimation - individuals, groups and nations
are irrelevant; we're merely *COLLATERAL DAMAGE*.

SNAFU is the real tragedy.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
^^^^^^^^^^^

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

The easiest way to deal with undesired information is to ignore it, to
pretend that it doesn't exist. Rulers often kill the messengers who
bring bad news, then offer condolences to the surviving family, group
or nation, or they find it easier to ignore the messages and the
plight of the relevant claimants, or otherwise humiliate, ridicule or
punish them, make them scapegoats for the ruler's own nefarious
purposes, showing an almost total lack of humaneness and courage.
Truth is unacceptable to these fearful little creatures and one should
maybe feel sorry for them, but certainly not accept their behavior.

As long as institutional correct procedure' is followed, burocracy
approves and commends, no matter how heinous the results of their
decisions, because their work and the social hierarchies rest on
threats, coercion, and direct use of brutal force.

It's possible that this article will be excluded from discussion in
many circles, for it questions the validity of convenient *facts* that
are most serviceable to the interests of established power; (ie) that
we asylum-seekers are worthless criminals, etc., and that we have a
negative influence on the community and state.

However well-confirmed the facts to the contrary may be, those facts
are frequently regarded as inadmissible, and should (according to
those in power) remain outside the spectrums of thought and debate.

This article - if invalid - may possibly be dismissed. If it is valid,
it probably will be dismissed ..... by certain parties.

As in the 18th-century doctrine on seditious libel, truth is no
defence; rather, truth heightens the enormity of the *crime* of
questioning and/or exposing - specific or general - realities of any
ruthlessness, amorality and/or other abuses of authority (individual,
collective and/or institutional) as practiced at any moment in time.

*******************************************

We welcome any feedback, and/or your articles or personal experiences,
for our monthly news-letter. Your e-mail address and name will NOT be
shown in the newsletter unless you expressly request it.

Welcome and keep sharing - this is a self-help group!

E-mail [3] asylum_seekers_forum@gmx.net

######################################################

[4] http://www.ncadc.org.uk/letters/news25/ausmental.html

Detention destroys asylum seekers' mental health Rachel Nowak, 'New
Scientist' Melbourne, 19 December 01

A powerful new alliance of Australian doctors is to call for an
immediate and independent clinical assessment of the physical and
mental health needs of asylum seekers in the country's detention
centres. The action comes after the publication of a controversial
article describing severe mental deterioration among some detainees in
December's Medical Journal of Australia. Every medical College in
Australia, along with other interested groups have banded together to
form the Alliance for the Health of Refugees and their Families.
Besides seeking independent health assessments of detainees, the
Alliance will also lobby for the improved conditions for asylum
seekers. This is particularly crucial for children, says Louise
Newman, chair of the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of
Psychiatrists' faculty of child psychiatry. Many other countries do
not detain asylum seekers but allow them to live in the community,
after ensuring that they are not a health or security risk.

Shock to paranoia In the MJA article, Kevin O'Sullivan, a former
visiting psychologist at the Villawood Detention Centre in Sydney, and
Aamar Sultan, an Iraqi doctor who has been detained in Villawood since
May 1999, describe inmates passing through four main stages of
psychological impairment.

Initially, asylum seekers are in a state of shock, but remain hopeful
that their confinement will be short-lived. Once they realise that
they face a serious threat of deportation, many become severely
depressed. In others, the symptoms of pre-existing post-traumatic
stress reactions worsen, and some detainees become violent. By the end
of Wednesday, two days of rioting at the Woomera detention centre in
South Australia had been quelled with water cannon and tear gas. After
repeated rejections of asylum applications, usually after six to 18
months, the depression often becomes more debilitating, and may be
accompanied by impaired memory, thoughts of suicide, paranoid
delusions, and psychotic behaviour. In the final stage, detainees may
isolate themselves from others, become unable to perform simple tasks,
and suffer hallucinations. "We're not talking about people being
glum," says O'Sullivan, "We're talking about people hearing voices,
about paranoid delusions." In the study, 13 of 33 detainees who had
been held for over nine months had paranoid delusions, and 19 had
psychological symptoms requiring medication, primarily
antidepressants. Separation anxiety The study also found that children
who are held at Villawood suffer a wide range of psychological
disturbances, including bed wetting, impaired cognitive function, and
separation anxiety. O'Sullivan says that the detainees' previous
traumatic experiences - which may include torture - combined with a
total loss of control of their lives, and the prison-like environment
of the centres, may combine to destroy their mental health.

Finding a way to prevent and treat the mental deterioration is
imperative, he says. "Paranoia is highly debilitating, it wrecks your
environment because you no longer trust anything."

But Philip Ruddock, the Australian immigration minister, has written
to the MJA, complaining that Sultan and O'Sullivan's article is
inaccurate. In the letter, Ruddock writes that he is "not addressing
medical issues", but claims that there are inaccuracies in the
article's description of the treatment of detainees.

For example, the article claims that "there are multiple daily musters
and nightly head counts, which may take place at 0200 and 0530".
Ruddock writes that 0200 head counts have only taken place following
escapes "and are not routine".

While insisting that the article's description of life in the centres
is largely accurate, O'Sullivan accuses Ruddock of failing to address
the main issue raised by the article, which is the mental
deterioration of detainees. The Human Rights and Equal Opportunity
Commission is conducting an inquiry into Australia's treatment of
child asylum seekers, but will not report for 12 months. The Alliance
doctors say this is too slow, as action is needed now. Source:
[5] http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns9999170

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

[6] http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/this_britain/story.jsp?story=87140

The damage: Custody takes toll on detainees Sophie Goodchild 5 August
2001

Dr Michael Peel, senior medical examiner at the Medical Foundation for
the Care of Victims of Torture, says jailing asylum seekers is
'inhuman and degrading'. It puts refugees at risk of permanent
psychological damage, with reactions such as panic attacks, severe
depression and suicidal tendencies, he says.

"Being in prison will make the refugees' psychological state worse.
Just the fact that they are being detained with no idea why or when
they will be released can cause major depression and post-traumatic
stress.

"What also concerns me is the lack of other people, the isolation in
prisons. Asylum seekers are treated worse than remand prisoners.

"For victims tortured in their own country, the mere sound of heavy
boots and jangling keys can bring back negative experiences. People
released from torture are healed by being involved in a community and
trusted. Prison undermines this; they become more isolated and
withdrawn. The prison health service is badly under-resourced anyway.

"I carried out a medical report for one asylum seeker in prison. He
was distressed because convicted criminals were being allowed to go
home and he was still there in prison with no idea how long he was
going to be there or why he was there."

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Yet AGAIN - desperate and dying refugees get screwed - another example
of UNs' self-aggrandizement at the refugees' expense, and - less
importantly - at our, the taxpayers', expense also.

Published on Thursday, October 4, 2001 in [7]The Herald (Scotland) by
David Pratt from the Afghan border

'It's Nothing but a Publicity Stunt' Books Outweigh Food in Convoy to
Famine Area

LIKE all the highly decorated trucks which wind through Pakistan's
north-west frontier, the convoy looks like a fleet of Spanish galleons
on wheels.

These particular trucks carry additional adornment, the fluttering
blue-and-white United Nations flags and the proud message, "Unicef aid
for Afghan Children." The convoy, the first of four from Unicef, is
bound for the famine-stricken province of Badakhshan, inside Northern
Alliance territory. It is a race against time. Already the
temperatures have started to drop and the first snows have fallen on
the only accessible passes. In Badakhshan, as in so many parts of
Afghanistan, life is hard beyond belief. Some 1.6 million people will
have run out of food here by December. They have just gone through two
years of drought. Despite this, not everyone welcomes the humanitarian
efforts of the UN. "It's nothing but a publicity stunt," admitted one
well-placed UN official candidly, asking not to be identified for fear
of being sacked. In the remote mountain village of Garam Chashma,
surrounded by the towering peaks bordering Afghanistan, locals and
some Afghan refugees looked on as laborers sweated in the afternoon
sun, unloading the Unicef aid, ready to be carried by 400 donkeys over
the Shah Saleem pass into Afghanistan. What were in most of the boxes?
I asked one of the drivers. "Ketab," he replied, using the Dari word
for books. Some 204,000 books, educational aids, and stationery made
up the bulk of the consignment. Of about 220 tons, only six consisted
of food, a high protein porridge called Unimix. "Believe me when I say
we are grateful for the books and the possibility of some education
for our children, but it is difficult to go to school when you are
weak or dead from hunger," said Haji Mohammed, an Afghan refugee man
from the Panjshir valley, who was standing nearby. He explained, and
apologized at the same time: "Books are important, but these things,
the food, warm clothes and medicines, are what will see us through
this winter." Hermione Youngs, the Unicef convoy leader, admits time
is short, but claims there is no credible alternative to the donkeys.
"Do you know how much it would cost to fly in a consignment, and
anyway the Taliban might shoot the plane down," she insists. This is
not quite right. Another UN agency, the World Food Program (WFP), has
already ferried over 1000 tons of wheat flour into Badakhshan by a
much more direct route overland from neighboring Tajikstan.

The lack of communication is typical of the UN, say insiders. At one
point this week, the convoy was delayed because it tried to use the
unofficial border pass of Shah Saleem, 16,000ft up the mountains. Ms
Youngs ran into trouble with local Pakistani officials, who said the
crossing was out of bounds to foreigners.

That any United Nations humanitarian agency would embark upon what was
already a complex logistical operation, without first having secured
such crucial permission from the Pakistani authorities, astonished
other aid workers.

"It's typical of how the UN operate. They launch into these grand
schemes without noticing the devil in the detail," complained one
worker from an independent group. "The point is the pressure was on to
be seen to be doing something, so they got this under way without
checking it through first."

Aid continues to arrive in Pakistan from all over the world. Michael
Huggins a WFP spokesman said: "Over 250 tons have already been flown
in, and another plane arrived last night carrying 46 more tons of high
energy biscuits. Five of these a day can keep an adult alive." Only
time will tell how effective the UN operation will be in saving lives.
"What we need is a coordinated and concerted effort and and no more
donkey photo opportunities," observed a UN field worker.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

ORGANIZATIONS a reader's viewpoint.

Back in my youth I read an article which described organizations and
burocracies which have reached a certain minimum size and complexity
as behaving like simple life-forms. Say, on the level of an amoeba or
paramecium.

Over the years of my life I've been watching, and my conclusion is
that this holds true. A particular large organizational system is not
ruled by its ostensible purpose. This includes both governments and
businesses -- and, with governments, various burocracies within the
governments. These are very simple life-forms, by their behavior.

Their first rule of order is to survive. This includes protecting
themselves from attack and finding food and reproducing. This is why
such organizational fields proliferate. They spawn similar offspring.

And we, the non-burocratic energy-fields are their food source. If
you do not think of them as being for our benefit then their behavior
makes more sense.

Remember, the individual atomic spark has "free will" but will tend to
flow with an overwhelming pattern/organized grouping. Thus the
individuals within any super-burocracy may believe the ostensible
purpose stated for the business/governmental branch, etc. and may try
to bring about honest, just and humane results. They are usually
known as "trouble-makers". Most of the energy sparks (individual
human beings)

within the energy-flow/entity of such super-organizational structure
will take the easiest way to get through their days and keep from
falling under the critical eye of their superiors. They "flow-with"
the super-patterned energy of the organizational structure and do not
"rock the boat".

It may be useful to point out to them what is
practical/decent/meaningful in the purported purpose of such large
organizational structures. I suspect that if enough of us out here
show even temporary organizational structures then the
energy-organizational

patterns themselves will respond to us as fellow beings for so long as
we are in our organized formats. As long as we are not perceived as
attempting to "kill" or "injure" the burocracy in question we have the
chance of being treated as "real" /fellow beings and may be listened
to, if clumsily.

Personally, it works for me to perceive all governments as being
larger versions of The Mob. You pay "protectia" (taxes) in the hopes
they'll leave you alone and save their worst for their rivals. You
get some side benefits but you realize they feel they're doing you a
big favor -- not that you'd already paid for them with your taxes.
It's like big government/ business is a large and rumbly mountain that
we all live on the slopes of, or in the river valleys below. You just
hope the mountain won't fall on you. When it does you better hope
there's someplace to hide from the worst of it. Technically, we have
a "shield" in the form of legal and social service systems but these
also are burocracies. You

might get lucky or they might turn out to be just one more part of the
landslide.

It is terrible that refugees are caught in the maws of these soul-less
systems. Once the mountain falls on you justice is rare if you can't
find a spot out of the avalance. I don't know of a cure. I don't
have much hope that these super-organisms of human-amalgamations will
ever form anything which is wholly benevolent. But I do know they are
all supremely dangerous. They scare the hell out of me.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

E-mail  ncadc@ncadc.org.uk Web site:
[8] http://www.ncadc.org.uk/

The Prayer Of The Political Bigot


"In the beginning God created states and borders. and the borders
were without form.

and God said let there be visas. and there were visas. and God
saw that the visas, were good and he divided visa nationals from non
visa nationals. and this was the first day.

and God said let there be waters between the borders and let
there be immigration officers in the midst of the borders and let the
waters and the officers divide peoples from peoples. and he told the
immigration officers to go forth and multiply. and this was the second
day.

and God said let there be passports and let these passports
provide a way over the waters for some peoples and not other peoples.
and the peoples denied a way he called economic migrants and bogus and
illegals. Those granted a way he called Europeans, Americans,
Canadians and Australians. and this was the third day.

and God said let the states bring forth housing officers and
welfare officers and social workers - so that economic migrants and
the bogus and illegals be denied housing, social welfare and work. and
this was on the fourth day.

and God said let there be brought forth prisons, induction
centres, accommodation centres and detention centres. and let the
prisons and the centres be spread over the face of the earth. and the
earth he called a Fortress. and this was the fifth day.
and God said let us make immigration officers in our own image.
and so he gave the officers power over every living thing that moveth
upon the earth and tried to moveth between the borders. and this was
the sixth day.

and on the seventh day God ended his work and rested. But the
immigration officers continued their work of imprisoning, excluding
and deporting. and the housing officers and welfare officers and
social workers continued their work of denying housing, social welfare
and work.

and God said this was good".

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

The Classic Recipe for Independence [9] hacohen@post.tau.ac.il

The classic recipe for independence:

Take people and send them to die.

Then make ceremonies, sew flags,

Sign a long charter with many words.

Feel how the back becomes erect,

Even though the hunchbacks remain crooked.

The classic recipe for independence:

Take people and send them to die.

Then open offices, eat watermelons, make love,

Shed sweat, feel in your mouth a light sense of disappointment.

Suddenly discover next to you another small nation, wretched and
oppressed.

Let its buzz bother you like that of a fly.

The classic recipe for independence:

Take people and send them to die.

Then crush the nation next to you, oppress it to dust.

It wants what you wanted - don't give it anything.

It points a pistol - reply with a canon, it threatens - you murder.

Let the living shout, let the dead rot away, let the undertaker win.

The classic recipe for independence:

Take people and send them to die.

Then shake hands, visit the tomb of the unknown soldier, open an
embassy.

Hold speeches on friendship, eternity, fraternity, commercial and
cultural ties.

Sit comfortably in an armchair, open an evening paper, read with
wonder:

Somewhere on earth, somebody is sending people to die.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

THE TIP OF THE ICE ARROW

The Man at the desk sits and signs papers

On the flesh of trees

On the skin of leaves

Declaring war and more

To be paid by the sweat and the blood

Of the poor

The Man at the desk sits and signs memos

For executions in prisons and battles

At the midnight hour

The Man at the desk is sitting

Signing documents for arms dealing

That will be used on somebody's

Children

Maybe yours, maybe mine, not his

On occasion documents get delayed

At such times the Man at the desk

Flies into a rage

Seizes a flower from a vase

And tears it to shreds

The Man at the desk has delusions

Of grandeur

Often acts as if he's above the law

And more

The Man at the desk has rawhide fingers

That never get tired and pens

That never run out of blood for ink

He is on automatic pilot

His servants never have to think

They obey orders

And kiss his arse for their paycheck

And never notice

They get shit on their lips

The Man at the desk sits and signs

Papers ..........

NOVEMBER BELFORD © May, 2002

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

1

References

1. mailto: asylum_seekers_forum@gmx.net
2.  http://www.worldservice.org/
3. mailto: asylum_seekers_forum@gmx.net
4.  http://www.ncadc.org.uk/letters/news25/ausmental.html
5.  http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99991707
6.  http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/this_britain/story.jsp?story=87140
7.  http://www.theherald.co.uk/
8.  http://www.ncadc.org.uk/
9.  http://lw12fd.law12.hotmail.msn.com/cgi-bin/compose?curmbox=F000000001&a=73d5094cd9367fb17e36aea2d295d5c1&mailto=1&to= hacohen@post.tau.ac.il&msg=MSG1018965299.84&start=2173380&len=6346&src=&type=x