Breaking a Person’s Spirit at Detention Centres

On September 20^th, I flew into London Heathrow Airport with the intention of catching a connecting flight to Edinburgh. My travel plans were to visit my heritage for a few days in Scotland, meet up with some professional contacts I had made during my PhD studies and visit a friend in London. This did not happen as I was refused leave to enter the United Kingdom. Instead the United Kingdom Border Agency (UKBA) intended to immediately deport me back to New York, the port that I flew from but not the start of my travels. I stayed with the intentions to either convince the UKBA officials that my intentions were true and that I was only coming to the United Kingdom to visit; or if refused entrance to the United Kingdom to continue on to another European or African port, or if both these requests were not possible than at least to deport me to my home city, Seattle, and not New York. After 22 days, several interviews with immigration officials and a public defender, and 93 documents passed on to me the UKBA deported me to Seattle, Washington, USA.

The photo is of a detainee’s asylum case at Harmondsworth. At the time of the photo the immigration office had already given him over 500 pages.

On September 21^st, the UKBA had me detained at Harmondsworth, a detention centre no more than a fifteen minute drive from London Heathrow’s Airport. I remained here until October 12^th. Driving into this centre is much like a prison, where the van shipping those detained drives into an inspection garage, and then through gates that are over 20 feet tall with 3 feet of razor wire dangling on both sides. The detainees are then walked by the guards upstairs where it takes hours to check each detainee in, partially because the detention centre is understaffed but also because the guards at the detention centre are not motivated to work diligently. Each detainee goes through a quick round of medical history questions, every detainee’s item is itemised and locked up, each detainee is patted down, and a general set of questions regarding a detainee’s dietary restrictions, faith, marital status are asked and recorded. It is at this time that a detainee is assigned to Fir House of the detention centre, a temporary holding area. Each detainee is given a mobile phone and SIM card. Each detainee also earns 71 Pence for each full day spent at the detention centre, which is very much needed as there is not enough credit on the mobile phone SIM card to even send a small message text to the London area.

The 3^rd Floor of Fir House, Harmondsworth Detention Centre.

When walking into Fir House wing of Harmondsworth, it continues to look like a prison with several perks. These perks, however, slowly melt away the longer a detainee spends here. The rooms are intimidating; they very much resemble a cell with the exception of a flat screen television and basic cable. Detainees in Fir House are locked into these cells at night from 22:00 to 7:00. There are two to three computers that allow for limited surfing over the internet. Social networks are blocked. In my own experience both of my Blog sites were blocked most of my detainment, starting on the 24^th of September when I submitted a Blog to the neocon-nightmare site until my departure on October 12th.

View from the foosball table on the 3^rd Floor of Fir House, Harmondsworth.

There are foosball, billiards, ping pong tables, and board games but use of these are restricted from 9:30-12:30, 14:00-17:30 and 19:00-21:30. Football and cricket can be played between the hours of 14:00-17:30 and 19:00-21:00 if there are guards available to oversee the use of equipment and detainees. All of these activities are at the discretion of the guards and can be withdrawn at anytime.

Harmondsworth can house up to 1000 detainees at once, with an average occupancy rate of 95%. It is one of the largest immigration detainment centres in Europe. Since there is a large volume of people here, the food is prepared in bulk and is often average to poor in quality, the only advantage being many of the dishes are prepared by South and Central Asian men who do a fair job in preparing curry and rice dishes. Such cooking, however, is alien and not desired by immigrants coming from the Caribbean, Sub-Saharan Africa and East Asia. Efforts at other cuisines are overcooked and not popular with the detainees. The portions detainees receive are only one plate per meal and the size of the portions given is dependent on the detainees working in the kitchen (some receive more or less than others). Most detainees abstain from breakfast as the offerings amount to only porridge or corn flakes.

Detainees queuing for food at the cafeteria in Dove House, Harmondsworth.

There is no argument comparing the Harmondsworth Detention Centre to that of Her Majesty’s Prison System. There are more perks and freedoms in Harmondsworth compared to prison. But when being housed at Harmondsworth a detainee learns quickly how superficial these perks are. They are limited not only by a strict set of hours but also by the guards and the detainees that work in the detainment system. They can be cut off at the discretion of one person. Politics certainly comes into play here. Unlike prison a detainee does not know how long he/she will be housed at a detention centre or if they will be released or deported. The longer they remain in a detention centre, however, the sooner they learn that the United Kingdom does not uphold and champion human rights. Instead, the immigration service turns a blind eye to those throughout the lower ranks of the detainment system to abuse their positions of authority in order to break the spirit of every detainee. By the time the immigration service has made a decision regarding releasing or deporting a detainee, that detainee is ready to concede to any decision in order to leave what is a hopeless and meaningless purgatory.

A New Study Area thanks to the overzealousness and incompetence of the United Kingdom Border Agency

Since I study North and West Africa I have little interest in Europe with the exception that African aid organisations are commonly based in European cities like London, Paris, Berlin, Geneva, and Rome. On the night of September 19^th I left the United States for the United Kingdom in order to visit some of the friends I have made through publishing articles, to see what job opportunities might exist for me in Africa through a professional contact, and to see my Scottish heritage (this one was not so important as the others but still part of my travel plans). I had plans to only be there for three weeks and then to continue to Continental Europe to meet up with other friends and professional contacts and then eventually return to Africa to either start a new job or continue with my research. When I arrived in London Heathrow Airport on the morning of September 20^th I did not know that the authorities would see such intentions as threatening to the maintenance and preservation of their borders, and what ensued from September 20^th to October 12^th was a confrontation between me, the United Kingdom Border Agency (UKBA), and the companies contracted out by the UKBA to detain individuals refused entry into, or being deported from the United Kingdom.

In addition to my naivety regarding revealing all my plans to the UKBA, there were other factors weighing in on the UKBA’s to refuse me entry. One was that I had no return ticket or on going ticket from the United Kingdom to another country. I have entered the United Kingdom before without one in 2004 and 2009, but then my intentions were to only visit and meet up with a committee member for my PhD studies (these two visits were technically work related, too, but the UKBA in Dover was flexible on both those times and permitted me in). At Heathrow Airport they searched my bags and saw that I had resumes and curriculum vitae in my possession. In the interview upon deciding whether to grant me entry or not on the 20^th of September, I also revealed that I did not intend on returning to the United States for a few years, as my work and life is on the continent of Africa. The price for my transparency was more suspicion and overzealousness on part of the UKBA. They deeply suspected that I would try to seek out work and illegally stay in the United Kingdom. They were only willing to deport me back to the United States and specifically to New York, the port I had come from. It did not matter to the UKBA that I was not from New York, that my family is on the West Coast, and that I had future plans of travelling onto Continental Europe and Africa.

The UKBA has the right to deny anyone entry to the United Kingdom but I was not about to have them ruin my other travel plans and further impoverish me by sending me to a city over 3000 miles away from where my friends and family are. I refused to be sent back to New York and they then handed me over to the contracted companies, ‘Reliance’ (who manage the detainment of people at Heathrow Airport and transportation of detainees to detention centres) and ‘GEO’ (An US Security Company that runs eight detention centres in the United Kingdom). I was at the airport until the morning of the 21^st and then transported over to the Harmondsworth Detention Centre. I remained here doing my best to convince the authorities to either allow me to enter the United Kingdom as a visitor in order to meet up with people, leave the United Kingdom for either the ports of Amsterdam or Casablanca, or if I was to be deported home then to Seattle and not New York. It would take two weeks to convince them to deport me back to Seattle and even when that was settled they gave me difficulty and tried to send me back to New York instead. They booked a flight back to the United States first landing in Chicago but then continuing on to Seattle-Tacoma airport for the 6^th of October.

The injustice of this whole experience did not end on October the 6^th. That morning I was awoken by the guards at 2:30 and checked out of the Harmondsworth Detention Centre. I was returned to Terminal 5 of London’s Heathrow Airport and was at the detainee waiting room by 4:30. My flight was at 7:55. At this point the authorities came to me and asked me if I had my passport. I reminded them that I had not seen my passport since September 20^th when the UKBA decided to refuse me entry and threatened to return me to New York. The authorities came back at 7:00 to tell me they could still not find my passport. It was likely I was going to miss my flight but they would try to rebook a flight. Twelve hours would pass before I grew agitated and demanded to see my consulate or someone from the immigration office. It was at this point that I was told they found my passport but that the immigration office would have to reschedule my flight. I thought that meant I would be waiting at Terminal 5 until they did. No. Instead I had to go through the process of checking into the Harmondsworth Detention Centre all over again, because of an immigration officer’s incompetence. I was back in the detention centre by 5:30 on October the 7^th. I suffered from sleep deprivation, and I remained another six days at Harmondsworth because of their negligence.

I encountered quite a number of people during this time in detention, from September 20^th to October 12^th. Many of those in a position of power suspected that I would resent and hate them considering the events that unfolded. I want to make it plain and clear right now that many of the guards, my solicitor (what we would call a lawyer in the United States), the authorities who interviewed me were all professional and courteous. So this Blog entry and future ones are not aimed at anyone who had personal involvement with my situation (except perhaps the incompetent immigration officer who failed to deliver my passport to the proper authorities on October 6^th). However, there is a price for detaining me, an academic, in a system that is very corrupt and counterproductive. The UKBA ruined my plans and deported me back to my country but my problem is minute and certainly not rare considering the many Africans, Asians, Latin Americans, and Eastern Europeans also detained by the UKBA. And since the UKBA allowed me time to meet some of these men, eat with them, talk with them, play ping pong and help them at times with their legal paperwork, I was compelled to document my observations at Harmondsworth and interview detainees that were willing to share their stories. I collected much of the paperwork circulating the detention centre, I took photos, I recorded conversations at legal visits and at the detention areas, I wrote down my personal observations and I conducted 30 confidential interviews from September 20^th to October 12^th. It was not my intention to stay in one place for 22 days and actually do research in the United Kingdom. But this crisis allowed me to see the injustices that many people experience and the inefficiency of coordinating immigration affairs between the UKBA and the private companies of Reliance and GEO. I will be posting information concerning the UKBA and United Kingdom’s immigration policies in the next few weeks to this Blog.



Detainment in the UK

My adventures are generally based on deviant activities, activism and alternative politics in the United States with this blog or my research and work in sub-Saharan Africa (the pastoral food security blog). At the moment, however, I am being detained by UK immigration at Harmondsworth, England, a detention centre near Heathrow Airport. I have been detained by the authorities since Tuesday 11:40, the 20th of September 2011, and in the downward spiral of events, I will likely be here for another week or two, perhaps longer, depending on what unfolds with my fight for entry into the United Kingdom.

These are some preliminary observations. More will come on subjects relevant to detainment but I wanted to start documenting this experience as, with the exception of Russians and Albanians, I am the only White person being detained at the moment, in fact the only American. Most of those spending weeks, months and even years at these centres are Indians, Pakistanis, Somalis, Algerians, Egyptians, Trinidad-Tobagoans, Sri Lankans, Nigerians, Congolese, Senegalese, Cameroonians, Bangladeshis, as well as many other nationalities. when they ask what my nationality is ... this question comes before any others, which is certainly understandable but quickly tiresome ... their eybrows raise when they here I am from the United States. For them an American should not be going through the frustrations and problems that they are experiencing. But as frustrating as it is to be detained and delayed in my plans to return, live, and work in sub-Saharan Africa, I see this as an opportunity to learn their stories and document the conditions these individuals face at UK detention centres.

As one can imagine with the large numbers of people detained by the UK border agency, Harmondsworth is not the only detention centre in the country. There are other centres in Colnbrook, Dover (convenient as there is the ferry over to Calais, France), Brook House, Campsfield House, Yarl's Wood and Oakington, including one in Scotland near the city of Glasgow called Dungavel. The one in Dungavel is coed, and this has apparently lead to some unintentional, international romances and pregnancies. Many detainees, whether there is contact with the opposite sex or not, have difficulty in dealing with the long waits, the stress and fear of either going through bureaucratic process to become an UK citizen or deportation to their own country or country the UK border agency believes the person comes from. 

I will write more later. For the moment, I wanted to give some preliminaries from my discussions with the other detainees at Harmondsworth Detention Centre, United Kingdom.      

The Manipulation of Current Politics

Downloaded from: http://logodesignlogo.com/wall-street-journal-logo

The ability multi-corporations have in influencing journalists who, in turn, manipulate the public through a ‘free press’ is disgusting. Mary Anastasia O’Grady of the Wall Street Journal recently gave an opinion piece entitled “Canada’s Oil Sands Are a Jobs Gusher” (downloadable at http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111904836104576560933917369412.html). To her credit, she rightly and fairly criticized President Obama’s ‘Jobs Speech,’ which had no concrete or tangible plan of creating jobs or improving the United States (US) economy. The author, however, took the opportunity after attacking Obama and his track history of supporting Environmental Protection Agency over energy exploration to promote energy companies interests under the guise of ‘job creation.’  

O’Grady promotes the construction of an oil pipeline from Alberta to the Gulf Coast, a project of TransCanada’s Keystone XL (a multinational energy corporation). She does this by displaying the achievements of Alberta’s Oil and Gas Industries (where over a quarter of a million people are directly employed), displaying Alberta’s low unemployment rate of 5.6%, and indicating the heavy involvement of United States in the exploitation of oil and gas through both the presence of both US Companies (totaling 960) and the US manufactured equipment used in construction, exploration and exploitation.

The positive spin O’Grady gives this Keystone XL project starts small and grows in size. She first mentions the oil production boom in the Bakken region of North Dakota, where unemployment is at 3.3%. She then brings in Keystone XL’s predictions of investment and job creation, 20 billion US dollars and 13,000 direct jobs respectively. To finish off any skepticism, O’Grady then brings in statistics from an interest group that is far from impartial, the American Petroleum Institute, who predicts the long-term economic benefits from pipeline construction amounting to possibly 1.4 million jobs with over 800 billion US dollars of investment.

Has O’Grady convinced you to support the Keystone XL pipeline project yet? Don’t be fooled. As someone who has visited and interviewed people involved in Alberta’s Oil and Natural Gas industries, I can say with confidence that there are social and environmental impacts that will result from the construction and operation of a pipeline from Alberta to the Gulf. For instance, a quick look at the volumes of water pulled from the Athabasca River, Alberta to extract oil from the Tar Sands is enough to shock anyone. First Nation peoples in Alberta are subject to air and water pollution from the oil and gas industries but are often paid off by the Canadian government or are too small a lobbying group to defend themselves from energy companies’ interests. Even if the Keystone XL pipeline creates 13,000 direct jobs and 100,000 indirect ones, this fails to reveal the differences in salaries, benefits, and safety standards that exist between Canadian and US workers. Currently those who work the derricks, who are known as ‘wildcatters’ in the United States and ‘riggers’ in Canada, have major differences in salaries and safety standards. Wildcatters are paid 14 to 18 US dollars starting, have inadequate breaks and lunches, and often work the derricks with a hardhat, pair of blue jeans and pack of cigarettes. Riggers are paid 35 to 40 Canadian dollars starting, have sufficient breaks, and wear protective eye gear and ear plugs. Given the Canadian dollar is at parity or slightly stronger than the US dollar these days, this shows that energy companies, and the authors promoting big business projects, are not acting in the interest of job creation and improvement of peoples’ lives. They are out for profit and ready to exploit a population that is not only suffering through a recession, but also manipulated by a ‘free press’ who market such corporate interests.

To be fair, if all the outcomes of the Keystone XL pipeline were given equal press, perhaps the US public would throw its support behind such a project. But when authors use terms like ‘job creation’ to spin the promotion of such projects without any consideration of social and environmental outcomes, it is deceitful and unethical. Even if O’Grady and many others like her promote projects like the pipeline, they should include a more balanced approach to what consequences there are if implemented. O’Grady criticized Obama for telling the general public nothing in his ‘Jobs Speech.’ I am criticizing O’Grady for promoting a vague economic portfolio if the Keystone XL pipeline is constructed. She omitted any discussion of the possible environmental and social outcomes of such a large scale project, not to mention what shortcomings or challenges that may exist in the financing, construction and maintenance of the pipeline. Policy makers, business leaders and journalists in alliance with business interests can show their sincerity in job creation and working for both profit and the common good if they are more transparent about the various potential outcomes that come from their policy goals and business practices.        

September 11th

Downloaded at http://www.itstactical.com/

"America Grieves, Reflects," is the headline in the Wall Street Journal on the tenth anniversary of September 11th. The hype is so big that it captures the front page of other major newspapers and web-based news sites. September 11th was a tragedy but it was not the only one to take place in the world. Some examples include Iran witnessing the bloody ousting of Mohammed Mosaddegh regime by the CIA in the 1950s. The Congo embroiled in civil war thanks to CIA meddling during the 1960s. Chile saw the massacre of Allende and his compatriots by CIA agents and allies in the 1970s. Nicaragua found US agencies on their soil and manipulating its politics in the 1980s. Iraq had the displeasure of two overt operations, first by the United States with United Nations backing in 1991 and later by the United States and its fabricated 'Grand Coalition' in 2003. The invasion of Iraq saw the dismantling not only of the Saddam Hussein regime but also the destruction of Iraqi economy and society. Over four million people in Iraq have been killed or displaced since the US occupation began in 2003. I ask the question, "Who should be grieving and reflecting and what over?"

In the past and present, the actions taken by the US government, its political allies and by US business interests directly resulted in the killing of tens of thousands of people overseas. Indirectly such actions can be linked to the deaths of millions. Yesterday, the United States took the time to reflect on the senseless death of three thousand people ten years ago. Certainly noble, certainly justifiable but in so doing, Americans blocked out or chose to ignore the reasons why those eleven men from different nations in the Middle East killed others and themselves in such a desperate act. In those eleven minds, their actions were justified, even noble, because what they did to the United States was no different than what the United States has done in their nations and others for over sixty years. Are their actions excusable or should even be pardoned? No. Are they understandable? Perhaps given the toll of abuses committed by the United States overseas in the past and present. All Americans should take the time to grieve and reflect, not only for the innocent people killed in this country for ideological reasons ten years ago but also for the innocent people killed overseas in the name of US interests and security.

Changing Face of Food Banks

 

Food banks are present on six different continents today thanks to the idea of John van Hengel, an Arizona native that saw it as wasteful for grocery stores to throw away food that was near expiration date, had damaging to the packaging, or was just not visually appealing to the consumer. For van Hengel and others who supported the creation of food banks, the idea of wasting food when there were needy people in the community who could use the food was a major injustice.

Surprisingly, the system of food banks started in 1967 and not earlier when food insecurity was a common reality for many families, even in North America and Europe. How food banks run vary, but they are commonly not-for-profit, charitable organizations that distribute food to individuals, families or other charities that follow through with distribution to the needy. Many believe that donations come from for-profit organizations like supermarket chains and farmers but this process is changing, at least in North America, according to interviews conducted from California to British Columbia.

 

Food banks are not federal institutions but are heavily reliant on funding and other forms of support from federal agencies. For those who need food but are ineligible or disheartened by the application processes for food stamps and other government programs, food banks are an easier option, as the only information needed is an identification card and utility bill that proves a person’s residence. From the interviews it was revealed that there are two major types of food banks in North America: one, where staff prepares food parcels for people and the other, where recipients wheel around shopping carts and staff allows them to pick two-to-three items from the shelves.

 

Food banks receive food through either purchasing it or through donations. Some for-profit stores are active in this charity by donating non-perishable food items that will not sell or pulling perishable ones off of the shelf in advance before they spoil. This, however, is becoming less common as food banks rely on monetary donations or federal assistance to purchase foods for distribution throughout the community. Foods are often purchased from bulk, low-budget grocery stores in order to stretch out their purchasing power and provide larger amounts of non-perishable items to the community.

 

Churches, sporting events, food drives, and similar charitable events are conducted to stock local food banks. In Western Washington, there are annual high school sports games called ‘food balls’ that bring in monetary and food donations for food banks. From California to British Columbia, postal carriers collect donated foods from households one or two weeks out of the year. These are, once again, small compared to the contribution the federal government makes towards the upkeep of food banks. Aside from monetary and direct food donations, the federal government also contributes food that is gleaned from regional agricultural zones. I was told of oranges present at a food bank in Western Washington coming from Arizona orchards that were picked by prison labor.

 

There is also the misnomer of too many people living well off of the dole, which is, taking advantage of these handouts by not working or profiting from food banks. During the interviews, there was never a person coming in with a luxurious car, wearing lavish clothes or jewelry. People who came in to receive their food parcels or shop around for their food were walking in off the street, biking in, mothers with their children, the elderly, and people of modest means.

Not all donations at the food banks go directly to those in need. Some foods continue through a chain of charity, reaching organizations like homeless shelters, churches and youth groups who either use the food to prepare meals, or distribute the donations at fixed times or particular events. As can be expected, there are certain stigmatisms and biases of people who appear at these gatherings or distribution points. They can be cajoled by others for accepting such charity and possibly feel too ashamed themselves to appear for such assistance. These situations make outreach difficult and food banks are aware that the numbers they serve underrepresent all those who are in need of food assistance.      

 

To remedy this situation food banks are now considering selling some of their donations, at a lower cost compared to discount food stores like Grocery Outlet, Cash & Carry, ALDI, and Bottom Dollar. The money made from such sales will go into the purchase of more donations and food bank operating costs. What is interesting about the outreach model is it is still a not-for-profit goal, but it may cut into the clientele that discount food stores now serve. Food bank employees do not like the comparison but with the numbers of poor people growing in the United States and the success of ‘no-frills’ supermarkets in securing a niche in the food service market, they will either be serving side-by-side with the discount grocery stores or competing with them for customers.

An Upcoming Police State

More and more local municipalities in the United States are seeing ex-police officers running for office. Most of these candidates in both their law enforcement and political careers promote a policy known as ‘zero tolerance,’ where minor infractions of the law are prosecuted to the furthest extent of the law. The thinking behind such a policy is that in order to prevent grave crimes from occurring like murder, forms of assault, illegal trafficking and grand theft, it is necessary to punish (to the furthest extent of the law) those who commit lesser crimes like breaking windows, graffiti, disturbing the peace, loitering, public drunkenness, or disloyal opposition (verbally disrespecting a police officer). The fines and time served for committing such small violations are increasing through new legislation and the general public, in general, is unaware and indifferent to the change. However, many voters believe or are told to believe that a clean street will nurture pure minds that uphold the law and report any deviant activity, keeping their neighborhoods safe from crime. 

The popularity of such a program rests well on the coattails and hysteria of September 11. More and more, Americans support candidates that are ‘tough on crime’ and are diverting public spending from institutions like public education, food assistance and health to security and law enforcement. Ask a recent graduate from a college or university who the three most active job recruiters are and he/she will say homeland security administrations, police departments and prisons. The financial crisis, however, struck a blow to this growth temporarily. States had no choice but to release some prisoners, often inmates that are in jail for marijuana possession or other minor offenses. But the US economy will eventually rebound, not necessarily to the prosperity known n the later half of the 20^th Century, but certainly to the point where it continues to be a major consumer of goods from China and other developing nations. When it does, what government exists at the local, state, and federal levels, will continue dismantling what social safety nets remain and increase spending on law enforcement.

The trend of diverting revenues to law enforcement instead of social programs is a reversal of the social safety nets set up in the 1960s and 1970s. These decades witnessed a counter-culture movement, a revolution that changed significantly how people thought about life, law and society. Though not all followed the movement, it was a time when people questioned the War in Vietnam, the intolerance and injustice of Jim Crow laws in southern states, gender roles, and in general how people treated others. It was a revolution that preached tolerance, acceptance of difference and began questioning the power structures in education, business, law, and politics. The counter-culture movement had its shortcomings and those who were a part of it, if asked today, will likely admit it never completed its objectives. Americans today, in fact, resemble the post-WW II generation that purchased many goods and feared the Soviets, only now the products come from overseas and the terrorism has replaced the Soviet threat.

There is a revolution coming in the United States. It is not based on ideas and thinking from the 1960s and 1970s, however. It is one of greater law enforcement and intolerance towards deviance and protest, eventually profiling and targeting all who are excluded from the wealth and power in this country. It is a state where the privileged are protected and the poor are punished, where the punishments grow more severe and are used in cases where people break the law under duress more and more. Those who can afford decent counsel are likely to walk away from their crimes while those who are represented by overworked, public defenders serve time and are slapped with hefty fines. The poor will be impoverished further and likely to commit more crimes with little opportunity and a growing hatred for authority. Law enforcement agencies commonly have the slogan ‘to protect and serve’ but this is not for the common good. Their services are for those who are part of the political and economic elite who live in gated communities or streets commonly patrolled by public and private police agencies. The rest, however, have the pleasure of living in fear of what activity will land them into a situation of being questioned by the police, detained, and possibly arrested in the emerging police state that is the United States.