Well firstly Dan, to say that failed asylum seekers have broken the law is straightforwardly wrong. It is not illegal to seek asylum and it is not illegal to be unsuccessful. How could it be illegal to fail a test that one has a right to take? It is no more illegal than it is illegal to fail a driving test or a university exam. Secondly, you seem to be entirely misunderstanding the purpose of the campaign. The point was not that any decisions as to asylum applications should be reversed, it was that the denial of means of subsistence to refused asylum seekers is not an acceptable (or effective) tactic in attempting to remove them. The truth is that many refused asylum seekers, through no fault of their own, are unable to return to their country of origin. As well as cases where the government has got it wrong and where returning would place the individual in serious jeopardy, there are often practical difficulties involved. The fact that they had to flee their country of origin may mean that they could not obtain travel documents or their own government or those en route may be uncooperative. The enforced destitution of these people fulfils no purpose and only serves to cause suffering. If you would like to find out more about the campaign I suggest you visit:
http://www.stillhuman.org.uk/

Your irrelevant comments about the Yorkshire ripper are completely despicable. It betrays a lack of integrity (as well as an inability to come up with satisfactory arguments concerning the issue at hand) to attempt to divert people’s attention to a highly emotive and unrelated case and to attempt to lump everyone who disagrees with you on one issue into another group entirely. I can only speak for myself but I can safely say that I am against the enforced destitution of asylum seekers and also against the early release of the Yorkshire ripper. I suspect that many people feel the same way.

Further, your comment about people adopting a “not in my back yard” policy is completely unfounded and it is extremely audacious and insulting of you to attribute such a view to the people at the sleepout with absolutely no evidence. Do you really imagine that none of the people who were at the sleepout live in London or any large city? That seems rather implausible to me. May I ask which community you live in that makes you feel so qualified to talk of the strain that such communities are under because of asylum seekers?