Now posts ↓

Thursday, 22 May 2008

A crack in the UK Asylum edifice


Comment piece for PinkNews

It's very hard for most British gay men and lesbians to imagine what it's like to grow up in a country like Iran. To fear what you are and to have to act with care 24 hours a day, lest your family finds out and possibly kills you in a so-called 'honour killing' or the state discovers you and tortures you.

So trying to understand the sheer torture of your boyfriend being discovered and executed, seeking safety from what you know is your certain, similar fate, in what you'd always thought was the 'civilised' West - and being disbelieved and rejected - is beyond most of us. Imagine how much harder this would be when you are still a teenager, most of us couldn't begin to.

But this has been the life experience of Mehdi Kazemi, still only 19 years old.

We all know the story - PinkNews has been one of the few news outlets which has been keeping us informed of the case's twists and turns. But there are many other 'cases' who have already been kicked out of Britain to unknown fates, who have committed suicide rather than be sent 'home' or shiver in fear today because this 'civilised' country leaves them 'hanging' for years before they learn their final fate.

In Holland their policy is to automatically grant 'leave to remain' to LGBT asylum seekers. If they commit no crimes, after five years they can claim Dutch nationality. Sweden has something similar — many other countries, including the United States, treat LGBT asylum seekers better than the UK. For the UK, 'leave to remain' - what Mehdi has - doesn't necessarily mean that people can stay permanently.

As Peter Tatchell told CNN, "at the end of five years [Mehdi] will have to go through the whole appeal process again."

The Dutch Liberal MP Boris van der Ham, who led parliamentary efforts to secure asylum in that country for Mehdi, made a point of finding out just how many gay people are 'flooding' into Holland under their policy. He did this because the debate there, echoing what some say in the UK, had included that familiar right-wing claim: 'we'll be flooded'.

It's 6 LGBT asylum seekers expected over the next year and 38-40 in total since 2006.

In the UK the ukgayasylum group has about 25 people currently on its books.

These are tiny numbers and both the Dutch and Swedish experience proves that adopting a civilised policy doesn't result in so-called 'flooding'.

But it is clear from my information through back channels that the Home Office has dug in its heels, remains extremely keen to 'not set a precedent' and is influenced by such reactionary ideas.

In a statement issued to CNN the Home Office said:

"We keep cases under review where circumstances have changed and it has been decided that Mr. Kazemi should be granted leave to remain in the UK based on the particular facts of this case."

The truth is that the only circumstance which has changed is the publicity and that cannot be the actual reason otherwise many others, like the gay Syrian JoJo Yakob, who The Scotsman is backing, cannot be kicked out.

The normal sort of statement is such cases is one like this from another gay Iranian's case about 'living discretely'(my emphasis):

"On the evidence we find the appellant can reasonably be expected to tolerate the position on any return ... For the reasons given the appellant’s appeal remains dismissed."

This reflects the attitude shamelessly outlined by Home Office Minister Lord Spithead in the Lords at the height of the interest in Mehdi's case:

“We are not aware of any individual who has been executed in Iran in recent years solely on the grounds of homosexuality, and we do not consider that there is systematic persecution of gay men in Iran.”

As the Mehdi campaign dragged on, as the Independent gave it a front page, as numerous Labour and other members of parliament lobbied, as the European Parliament passed a resolution, as US networks carried it on their evening news, the fear that he would indeed be deported regardless was very real. They have done it before.

As gayasylumuk's Omar Kuddas explains:

"He was almost deported at Xmas. They came for him at precisely the time when they thought it would be hardest to get lawyers and others out to defend him. This is how the Home Office behaves."

There have been others before Mehdi. Last year the Italian Prime Minister contacted Gordon Brown to argue the case for Iranian lesbian Pegah Emambakash - all to no avail as she slipped from news coverage and is now on her last legal legs to save herself from deportation back to Tehran. JoJo Yakob in Scotland has just suffered through the blatant homophobia of the Home Office on display at a Tribunal and will only be safe if a judge is sympathetic and rejects that homophobic policy and practice for which Jacqui Smith and, ultimately, Gordon Brown are responsible.

Kuddas is one of the many unsung heroes - gay and straight and from many countries - who have helped save Mehdi. As you read the many claims of responsibility for 'Jacqui's u-turn' from politicians and some showboating organisations over the next few days bear that in mind.

The only reason that the government shifted in Mehdi's case was because it was all getting just too embarrassing for Gordon Brown. Him, not Smith. And they hope that by granting leave to remain just to Mehdi, and by twisting their 'rules' in order to do it, that we'll all shut up.

They don't want a policy change and there is no doubt in my mind that the real reason is because they fear the Daily Mail and other agenda-setters and their 'hardline' against asylum seekers more than they fear a backlash from us, the LGBT community. Tony Blair and David Blunkett set the 'quotas to fill' ball rolling and Jacqui Smith is the latest to be carrying it through and damn the consequences.

They present one face to us citizens and another face - 'discretion' and blatant homophobia - to persecuted foreign LGBT who dare to claim asylum. Worse, another Department - the Foreign Office - is out there preaching to other countries about Human Rights, including LGBT rights. The hypocrisy couldn't smell any stronger.

What I think has been their major political miscalculation is precisely their perception of the attitude of Middle England. When publicity about Mehdi was at it's height you had to search for hardline opinion saying 'throw him out anyway' and even those saying this had a guilty tinge to their tone.

Comments left with the Daily Mail and - yes - even those of The Sun's readers recognised this country's historic attitude to accepting genuinely persecuted people as refugees - it goes back centuries, it's part of who we are. It was clear from reading those comments, and many of those on the 7,000 strong petition, that ordinary British people well understood this and accepted that this meant accepting persecuted gays and lesbians from countries like Iran. It was also clear from the horrified overseas media coverage - 'this is Britain!?'

But this political miscalculation only seriously holds true if, now he has 'asylum', Mehdi's case isn't seen as a one-off and, particularly, if gays and lesbians hold Labour to account for their unchanged homophobic policies towards these members of our community. I fear we won't. So prove me wrong.

For us, I think the government's attitude to the pitifully few LGBT asylum seekers we have in Britain shows them up as hypocrites over LGBT rights. I honestly think that they think these people are so powerless, that their cases so rarely provoke protest and news coverage, they can safely ignore protest; that they will not face any consequences.

They just don't expect a voter backlash.

For us, I think we need to be collectively saying 'enough is enough' to Labour on LGBT asylum seekers and behave as one community. I, for one, could not be happier for Mehdi but I am not 'grateful' to Jacqui Smith or her boss for this crack in the asylum edifice.

It will take a lot to get me voting Labour again (after a lifetime of support) precisely because of how I have seen how they treat these weakest members of our community. I hope you feel the same and I hope you tell Labour why you feel it. Until they change their shameful policy on LGBT asylum seekers they don't deserve anyone's vote.

Tuesday, 20 May 2008

Who's supporting Mugabe?


Despite inflation now estimated at 500,000%, some people are making money in Zimbabwe.

News came out at the weekend that the Chinese arms had arrived in Harare, via Angola and via UK based charter airline Avient Airlines, based in Salisbury (Wiltshire) and currently under investigation for arms smuggling in the DRC. And allegedly through refueling support sanctioned by Thabo Mbeki.

A German company, Giesecke & Devrient (G&D), based in Munich, is flying in new banknotes every week - the German government has refused to intervene.

Barclays is the bank for the Zimbabwean leadership's stolen money. Standard Chartered Bank and the insurance firm Old Mutual have funded the regime.

Also at the weekend came this.

Zimbabwe Threatens to Prosecute Abusers of Mobile Phone Text Messages

APA-Harare (Zimbabwe) Zimbabwe’s telecommunications regular says it will monitor mobile phone messages to fight what it sees as abuse of the short-message-service (SMS), state radio reported here Sunday.

The acting chief executive of Postal and Telecommunications Authority of Zimbabwe (POTRAZ), Charles Sibanda told the Zimbabwe Broadcasting Corporation that his organization would prosecute subscribers found abusing the SMS service.

Zimbabweans have relied on the SMS service to communicate political messages, particularly after the disputed March 29 general election which was won by the opposition.

Individuals and civic organizations have used text messages to communicate news headlines, election updates or political jokes about President Robert Mugabe.

Sibanda warned that POTRAZ could trace the source of any abusive message and bring offenders to book.

Zimbabwe already monitors Internet traffic following the passing last year of legislation allowing President Mugabe’s government to eavesdrop on telecommunications.

POTRAZ is a statutory body established in 2001 to licence and regulate players in the telecommunications industry.

This sounds more like an empty threat than anything as sophisticated as the Chinese manage. Nevertheless, some 'Western' company undoubtedly supplied and is supporting the equipment enabling them to make the threat — haven't found out who they might be, any ideas?

What's interesting is the dictatorship recognising the power of SMS in Africa - it played a very important role in the Kenyan crisis and this recognition also occurred there. What's terrifying and needs exposing is who is undermining this power from the ordinary Africans by giving the tyrants the tools to close this power down.

Mehdi wins 'leave to remain'

I am just waiting on confirmation for this but I have just heard second-hand that Mehdi Kazemi has been granted asylum. More detail when I get it.

2.30pm: It's confirmed, Mehdi told the ukgaynews website that he had received a letter from the Home Office today to say his asylum request had been granted.

“I am so happy,” he said, adding that he was grateful to all the help he had been given, especially by Simon Hughes MP.

A statement will be issued tomorrow. I am very interested in how the Home Office will explain the grounds!

Updates: all updates - coming in fast now - on this fantastic news are now on mehdikazemi.com

Support aboriginal people, tell the FCO how


Did you know that the Labour government is failing to support international conventions for indigenous peoples?

It's not at all publicised but the UK Foreign Office is one of the world's most bankrupt when it comes to looking after indigenous peoples. That's you, master Miliband.

Well, there's a new push to get them to change their tiny minds

ILO 169 is the only international law for tribal peoples. It will become the world’s benchmark when more governments agree to it. Those that don’t ratify it make it weaker.

The UK has refused to ratify ILO 169 on the basis that there are no tribal peoples in the country. But this ignores the impact of British companies and development projects on the lives of tribal peoples across the world. Never mind our historic responsibility.

Act Now

Put pressure on the government to ratify ILO 169. There are several ways you can do this:

Dunwoody, YouTube + how not to do it


Simon Dickson alerts me to some yawnsome Sky News liveblogging activity regarding the Crew + Nantwich by-election, which reminds me of a viral video featuring the not-quite-Gwyneth candidate - Tamsin Dunwoody.



4,600 views is quite a lot for a UK-sourced political viral and it's a good one, 'cos she sounds like a nulabour robot.

There's no video response from Labour. Opportunity? Lost.

The local CLP has a channel with views in the low hundreds and absolutely no viral activity attached. Did they not inform Labour Bloggers?

No one's posting their content. And it's not happening even when they have a Real Life Star attached in the shape of Vera Duckworth.

Get a load of this:



How to NOT do this. Vera barely gets a word in. Let the showbiz legend sell your bleedin' candidate! Make her the producer! Make the thing viral! It's not a 'black art'! The other videos feature a parade of Ed Balls types playing up for the camera and looking like dicks. Doesn't work! Vera's the shining star amidst the dross. Create a viral with just her and you'd be talkin' ...

How much is Labour spending on marketing and where are they spending it? Not on consultants sourced from the Obama campaign. Obviously.

Monday, 19 May 2008

Zimbabwe Benefit Foundation


The terrible attacks against civilian voters in Zimbabwe are leaving behind hundreds of mutilated and injured men, women and children, many of whom have also had their homes burned and all their possessions destroyed. Zimbabwe Benefit Foundation (ZBF) is coordinating and funding a series of emergency assistance projects to send medical supplies, blankets, food packs and basic building materials directly to the traumatised victims.

Code for button for your website or blog.



ZBF has a successful record of raising and deploying funds on a number of projects in Zimbabwe that have made a vital difference to the lives of many of the beneficiaries. Your donation will enable them to build on a base of existing support and projects in one of the world’s neediest countries.

Donate here

Thursday, 15 May 2008

"Shut the hell up"



Anyone who thinks American news is a monolith, Keith Olbermann is an exception. On his MSNBC show he goes on this quite fantastic rant against Bush, which I commend to you:
  • To Bush, "freedom is just a brand name,"
  • To Bush's statement that he was "told by people" that there were WMDs in Iraq: "People? What people?... Mr. Bush, you destroyed the evidence that contradicted the resolution you jammed down the Congress's throat, the way you jammed it down the nation's throat."
Substitute Blair for Bush and - yes - this is relevant to us.

West Midlands Police finally apologise ...


... but only after being taken to court.

Last year I covered how Channel Four's 'Dispatches' sent undercover reporters into British mosques and filmed preachers saying amongst other things:
“Do you practise homosexuality with men? Take that homosexual man and throw him off the mountain.”

“If I were to call homosexuals perverted, dirty, filthy dogs that should be murdered, that’s my freedom of speech isn’t it? They’ll say: “No”, I’m not tolerant. But they feel that it’s okay to say something about the Prophet.”

"Whoever changes his religion from Al Islam to anything else – kill him"
And how, after a ridiculous 'investigation', West Midlands Police (and the Crown Prosecution Service) instead of prosecuting these people for inciting violence made a complaint to Ofcom about the editing of the programme claiming it was 'stirring up racial hatred'. A complaint which itself was technically odd.

I noted that this was the same police who had a fraught relationship with their local gay and lesbian community.

And how police in general had had to be forced into taking action against murder music, dancehall reggae which is all about how to kill gays and lesbians.

I even found myself on the same side as the Editor of the Daily Telegraph, Charles Moore, who said:

I do not know whether the Dispatches programme is right in every detail. But it clearly raises serious, important questions - about extremists in our midst, about the way apparently moderate organisations give them shelter, about the Saudi Arabian network that supports them.

What security agencies call "thematic analyses" show that, at present, the problems of Islamist extremism are particularly acute, especially in prisons and universities, in the West Midlands area.

Yet the West Midlands police and the Crown Prosecution Service decide that the target of their wrath should be not people who want to undermine this country, but some journalists who want to expose them.

Are they fit to protect us?

Late last year, Ofcom threw the complaint out and Channel Four then decided to launch a court action for defamation.

Andy Duncan, Channel 4 chief executive, said at the time:
West Midlands Police acted in a calculated fashion - they made no attempt to discuss their concerns about the film with us in advance of going public with their complaint to Ofcom knowing that an allegation of 'fakery' would generate significant media interest. Their action gave legitimacy to people preaching a message of hate to British citizens.
After being dragged to court, this apology and £100k payout is the result (half of the payout covers costs, the other goes to the Rory Peck Trust for freelance news gatherers and their families in times of need).
Following an independent investigation by the broadcasting regulator Ofcom, we now accept that we were wrong to make these allegations. We now accept that there was no evidence that the broadcaster or programme makers had misled the audience or that the programme was likely to encourage or incite criminal activity. A review of the evidence (including untransmitted footage and scripts) by Ofcom demonstrated that the programme had accurately represented the material it had gathered and dealt with the subject matter responsibly and in context.

We accept, without reservation, the conclusions of Ofcom and apologise to the programme makers for the damage and distress caused by our original press release.
[CPS apology]

I think they should apologise to the gay and lesbian community - infact the whole community - as well, for 'wasting police time'.

The people who were responsible and should suffer some consequences are:
  • CPS lawyer, Bethan David
  • Assistant Chief Constable of the West Midlands Police, Anil Patani
  • West Midlands Chief Constable, Paul Scott-Lee
Amongst others who weighed in against Channel Four were
  • The secretary general of the Muslim Council of Britain, Muhammad Abdul Bari
  • Press spokesperson of the Muslim Council of Britain, Inayat Bunglawala
I would also be interested to know who, if any, of Birmingham's MPs supported Channel Four.

And whether any prosecutions for 'incitement to violence' against the hate preachers exposed in the documentary will ever follow.

Wednesday, 14 May 2008

Hits and anniversaries


Dave Briggs posted something about his stats and Jeremy Gould missed his anniversary.

Dave also posted something along the lines of 'wail! Is anyone listening!'. I've now gone past my anniversary so they're both reminding me to cover this terrain ...

I actually started this because I was posting long thoughts elsewhere and I clipped a lot and passed that on - which can become annoying. I should have done this earlier but really the blog is primarily for me! I dig up ideas and clips all the time; it's an online dump for me, this blog.

I actually got a comment from someone on one of my Google Reader dumps complaining that I 'didn't know how to have a structured conversation'. Well, doh! Some posts definitely are worked up in that sense and others aren't. What's a 'my del.icio.us links' dump? Not a 'conversation', that's for sure.

Some posts are more about my trying to get attention for something - like my recent stuff on searches for suicide and trying to take on the BMJ. That's also how my Mehdi Kazemi work started. Doing this attention-seeking is hard work though - I know this from doing online work for Mehdi, hours of adding comments and sending out email (worked though - we won).

Mostly I'm not thinking that hard about getting attention, it's me working through an argument and stretching myself a bit or just following an interest - like the use of web in the US primaries. It definitely isn't some kind of service! If it was an extension of my business I'd pay more attention to promotion - but my work is on the other side of a Chinese Wall.

There's a lot of posts I've done I'm quite pleased/proud about and the blog's been extremely useful for networking and raising issues in my main area of interest - egov.

Some others I've done, like the Kenyan blogosphere posts, have given me a big smile when I've had feedback from people working in that area. Same happened with the BMJ stuff actually.

So, since last April I've done 616 posts. These have covered a lot of subjects because I have fairly wide interests though most have been web related in some way.

The web is something I've lived with now for thirteen years. I've a post which I'll finish (soon!) which is about how I first saw it in 1994 (wait, that's fourteen years ... ). And I've seen numerous times, first-hand, the power of it in changing lives of people and communities. I'm pretty much an evangelist on that score, both commercially and socially.

I've been and gone with looking too closely at stats or technorati authority. I do look sometimes to see if certain people have been (i.p. address tells you a lot), and to see if I have a new referrer. But doing this has been about learning how to understand stats more than anything. I now have three sources, so Google Analytics tels me only part of the picture. I now get some RSS numbers through Feedster for example. In a year I've had 21,000 vists but the best number is 3000 returning visitors. Must be doing something right.

Most of my traffic comes from Google search, so my top content has included:
All got hundreds of hits, a couple got over a thousand.

Which tells me a lot about the power of titles.

When I have had a major referrer this has blown out traffic. So
All also got hundreds. The BBC link still sends lots of clicks through but this also shows to some extent how viral happens because none were sought and some were from very odd referrers (there's been 724 in all)

Almost all of these pages are recent but some older content has also built up hundreds of hits, such as:
Hits in general have been going up and that's a reflection of Google, including Image Search, being my main referrer and positioning improving, as well as some other new or growing referrers like BBC, GoogleBlog and technorati.

What doesn't get huge numbers is egov posts, but I know this doesn't mean they don't get read.

I'm also not hugely bothered by getting comments or not. When I see something I just agree with, I rarely comment. So I'm often assuming that!

Enough. Not really one for too much self-analysis and this is plenty ;]