psychotic the thing with tb. other poorer countries do not vaccinate against it. so they catch it either here or over there. it maks no difference. that is why there is a high incidence of asylum seekers with tb. that however does not prove that it increases the risk of british citizens. tb exists anyway, these people who aren't immigrants possibly would have caught tb anyway since they weren't vaccinated whether it be from animals, a vaccinated carrier, or an infected person.

of course the incidence of tb will be higher in the unprotected immirants. and so if there are more of them there will be more overall tb. this however does not link it to higher tb in the native population. all it means is that there are more unprotected people catching tb.

the conservative thing. what they meant was to take asylum seekers from countries which the un designates as having serious problems where there is famine, war, genocide or danger to these people. thus it means that people from countries which are relatively stable will not be able to immigrate. it isn't meant that they will take the people from the un merely the list of countries which the un deems to be dangerous.

this though fails as we have seen with the recent problems in zimbabwe and the asylum seekers we wat to send back. and prevents economic migrants who may be off benefit to the country. british people do the same, we move to america, canada, australia, etc. not through fear of violence but because it seems like a nice place to live.

also the recent government report on illegal immigrants is valuable. why? because it gouped in the 3 classes if illegal immigrants, the failed asylum seeker, the overstayer, and the smuggled ones. the biggest group? the overstayer. the students that stay past their dates and tourists which stay on. and the biggets group among these? americans.

it shatters the whole view of immigrants being arab or eastern european and unable to speak english.

that was the governments own finding.