Hi Mark. Thanks once again for the contribution. Yes I singled out Britain as the only country that has acted in the ill-treatment of Asylum Seekers in this 21st century. I also heap criticism on Britain, "Quote me right" Not on Ordinary citizens of Britain, but on the Law makers and stake holders in parliament who have the powers to make and promulgate laws.

Mark, your statement which I quote "But let's be clear. I agree with you that the damage my country has done (and in many ways, continues to do) to the African continent means that we should be playing a very strong role in helping African countries out of the mess we helped drop them in".

Lets face it, this is pay day, I am not only saying that the African Asylum seekers should be treated fairly but own to the fact that Africans fathers+Mothers+Children were captured enslaved taken away by force," The first Liberian were taken to the west" This have destroyed a heritage and only God knows when they will recover from it, especially when the exploitation is still ongoing economically till date and not yet addressed rather celebrated by the British.(Called black history)

The Issue of this ill-treatment by British law makers is not a separate issue to Refugee, who is a refugee? A refugee is one who has been identified/certified/enabled by the UNCHR as a refugee and was granted Refuge status in another country after he or she fled his or her country to another as a result of persecution, War, social or cultural reasons, poverty, drought Religious. And an Asylum Seeker is one who fled his or her own country to seek refuge/asylum in another for fear of been persecuted in his own country due to his or her involvement/opinion in a political activities, or a human right activist with a well founded fear of persecution. Without both we will not talk about one and leave another therefore, I think that both are same in terms of Refugee and Asylum.

However, why it looks as if I am only speaking on behalf of Africans is because they are the most afflicted by this Asylum issue because blacks are minority doing meaner jobs in UK, the number of Blacks seeking Asylum in UK is below 10% yet most of them are Refused. Every day you read from the websites Congo Families with Children arrested in detained at Yarl Wood removal centre awaiting deportation with flight arrangement and Deported. Yet we kept quite. For the mere fact that a child is born here in UK is the Childs right to live and grow in UK without any hindrance. Recently Migrants from EU are coming to UK for Economic Migration taken up all the jobs left for the minority making this unbearable for them, creating a certain distance between minority and majority. This could suggest increase in recent gun crime raging the black community.

Mark all am saying is that people like you should speak out to defend this vulnerable Asylum Seekers rather than argument let our law makers treat them fairness rather than tagging them illegal /economic migrant when we all know that we made a fortune from their land.

Solution/supports should be the way out.
Kenzo

Hi again Kenzo,

I wasn't arguing that Britain should not be blamed for it's very major role in the slave trade and for the damage our governments and coporations have done to africa. I was simply saying that I think it's an over-simplification to single out Britain as the only country that has acted in this way.

I also don't like generalisations that heap criticism on an entire country. They don't really help anyone.

But let's be clear. I agree with you that the damage my country has done (and in many ways, continues to do) to the African continent means that we should be playing a very strong role in helping African countries out of the mess we helped drop them in.

But I also think this is a seperate issue to the refugee issue. Are you saying that Britain should treat African refugess differently to refugees from elsewhere?

Thanks Mark for the Support: Refreshing our Memory (Mark)if you Read the Slave British History, Britain played a major part in the destruction of the African heritage, Britain as it were have no major natural resources, its quest for economic/power aquistion etc led to it colonising 1/3 of the World, "NOT OPENING OF AFRICAN HERITAGE" rather destruction. But for the sake of History during the Slave trade Liverpool played a very insumantable malicious role. Main European Nations involved in slavery were Portugal, Spain, Britain, France, Netherlands, Denmark and Sweeden.Britain began large scale slaving through private companies in the 1640,s the London based Royal African Company was the most important and from 1672 it had a monopoly of the British Trade."Because it was very profitable".

In the early 1700 most of Britain’s slave merchants were from London & Bristol. However, Liverpool merchants were increasingly involved and about 1740 were outstripping their rivals. Although London, Bristol and other parts continued to send ships to Africa. Liverpool dominated the transatlantic slave trade until its abolition in 1807. Indeed, Liverpool was European port most involved in slaving during the 18th Century. The towns and its inhabitants derived great civic and personal wealth from the trade which laid the foundations for the ports future growth.

Merchants and citizen of Liverpool, including many of the mayors, were involved. Thomas Golightly (1732 - 1821) who was first elected to the town council in 1770 and became mayor in 1772-3, is just one example. Several of the towns MPs invested in the trade and spoke strongly in its favour in parliament."Why ? Because the Govt is making money on Tax" James Penny, a slave trader, was presented with a magnificent silver epergne in 1792 for speaking in favour of slave trade to a parliamentary committee.

By 1730 about 15 ships a year were leaving for Africa and this grew to about 50 ships a year in the 1750s. Rising to just over a 100 in each of the year of the 1770s. Numbers decline during the American War of Independence ( 1775-83) But rose to a new peak of 120-130 ships annually in the two decades preceding the abolition of the trade in 1807. Probably three quarter of all European slaving ships at this period left from Liverpool. Overall Liverpool ships transported half of the 3 million Africans carried across the Atlantic by British slaver.

Mark If the above is recorded at the Slave trade museum in Liverpool verified authenticated by Historians for study by this 21st Century, why can't Britain be blamed for the destruction of the African heritage????

Yet After Abolition of Slave trade Britain which paved way for British exploitation on OIL, Gold, Diamond and other minerals yet from AFRICA Soil: till date. yet few Africans fleeing persecution seeking Asylum in UK are being turned down,Other Countries such as France, Germany, Spain etc that are involved in this malicious trade on humans have granted Amnesty to especially African Asylum Seeker."Belive me Mark the Hipocricy in British Politics have damaged a lot" We need more men and women in Britain who will stand up and defend the Asylum Seekers in UKs Parliament.

Thanks a lot for your thoughts
KENZO
ken9098057@aol.co.uk

I don't think you can say it was just Britain that destroyed the "black man's heritage". Britain certainly played a shameful and major part in the recent history of Africa, but so did many other European countries. I was at a talk a while back where I learned that the Rwandan genocide had its roots in the way the Belgian colonists reinforced class differences between Tutsis and Hutus as part of their efforts to control the country.

Also, blaming an entire country is fraught with danger. Let's not fan any flames of national resentment here. Every country is made up of generous, supportive people and self-interested, uncaring people.

Anyhow, your feelings about the need for apology and compensation I support.

Take it easy, Kenzo :)

Mark.

Stigmatization of African Asylum seekers:
The very Economic reasons greed and selfish quest of the Westerners which led Britain to support, spearhead and even implement bi-lateral regulations on the illicit, inhuman, malicious, barbaric, trade in humans.

Asylum seekers are not criminals to be detained, the real criminals are those who are above the law, Lots of British people outside the shores or UK are being treated like King in Africa yet back home in UK black people are treated like criminals.

We all should not kept quite about this the Black Mans heritage was destroyed for ever by Britain.Women, Children, families were invaded in the 1600 by Britain taken captives to slavery for economic reasons, Britain involved in Colonization of most African countries were they hanessed GOLD, CRUDE OIL, DIAMOND COPPER, COCO COFFEE etc today is the pay day for Britain yet we all kept quite at the treatment of Black African seeking Asylum in UK.

Is high time we all stand up to unite this Race teach, appologise with compensation the Africans rather than labelling them bad yet blame their Democracy, yet we sold arms, tested arms, dumped toxic in African soil, etc. contd