It’s such a little AP notice; hardly more than a blip on the news ticker but, as of January 4, 2010, Immigration and Customs Enforcement will no longer detain asylum seekers to the US if they can prove a credible fear of persecution in their home countries. ICE Director, John Morton, under the orders of the Obama Administration, said that if asylum seekers can meet certain conditions then they can temporarily enter the US.

At time of entry, the asylum seeker must be able to prove their identities, not be a danger to America, not be a flight risk and must fear for their lives or physical safety if they return home. As it stands now, any asylum seeker without documentation is deported immediately while many of the documented are detained until processed.

As with any so-called “improvement” by socialist dominated regimes in once free Western countries, it is always important to go beyond what looks good on their paper to see what such programs look like in practice in other nations. In spite of President Obama’s best efforts to totally alienate them, one need not look any further than our still closest ally, Great Britain.

Because of its overly generous, easy-to-obtain welfare benefits, asylum seeking has been the favorite sport of immigration fraudsters in the UK for nearly a decade now. Immigrants from China, Africa, the Middle East, the Balkans, South America and even blacks from the United States have all hit the UK’s shores claiming persecution in their home countries. Even though 97% of the claims are proven false, EU restrictive human rights laws, unscrupulous lawyers and liberal judges make it almost impossible to deport those making bogus claims. In 2006 alone 80,000 bogus asylum seekers were granted amnesty by the UK government because their caseload was too great and the majority of them had simply melted into the general population.

Asylum seekers in the UK get preferential treatment over native Brits and it is not unusual for bogus asylum seeker families to go right to the head of the line for social housing, medical treatment, job training and educational slots. Add the bogus asylum seeker numbers to the illegal immigration and human trafficking going on in the UK and the UK has for all intents and purposes lost complete control of its borders.

It is also not unusual either for bogus asylum seekers in the UK to game the system while maintaining their ties to their native countries through property and bank holdings. As an example, just this past month UK welfare officials discovered that a Dubai property owning Muslim woman bearing a Dutch passport had for seven years collected the equivalent of $116, 900.00 while passing herself off fraudulently as a Somali asylum seeker. Plus the woman claimed an additional $50,400.00 by saying that her husband and she were no longer living together when, in fact, they were. She also bore three children during this time and claimed national welfare benefits for them too.

Yet the woman and her husband did not go to jail for fraud nor was she deported. The Somali lawyer, who advised her to create a false identity, was not punished nor deported either. The lax enforcement of immigration laws and the incredible ease with which bogus asylum seekers and all immigrants, legal or otherwise, get access to British welfare has earned that country the nickname, “Soft Touch Britain”.

The native British population is horrified at what is happening to their country but any debate is killed by playing the race card. Since 2000 charges of gross incompetence against the Labour Government have been leveled but recently it came to light through actual admission from civil servants and advisors, Andrew Neather, who worked for Tony Blair and Jack Straw and Jonathan Portes, a former speech writer for Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, that the decision to flood the UK with immigrants of any claimant status was to demographically and multi-culturally change the UK through diversity and to use the race card to humiliate the Tory Party if they objected.

Mr Neather commented on Labour’s Open Door Policy by saying, ‘I remember coming away from some discussions with the clear sense that the policy was intended – even if this wasn’t its main purpose – to rub the Right’s nose in diversity and render their arguments out of date.’

While Labour is congratulating itself on importing millions of new Labour voters, tens of millions of Brits are hardening in attitude against the Labour Party and it is expected that in the UK’s next General Election, tentatively scheduled for May 2010, Labour will be thrown out of office and kept out for at least the next decade.

Perhaps the Obama Administration, in its eagerness to emulate “Soft Touch Britain” by easing America’s asylum rules in order to demographically secure votes and wield the race card against Republicans and conservatives, should seriously take into consideration what happens politically in the UK in May 2010. While it would be nice to see the US Socialist Democrats out of power for at least the next decade, if not permanently with our 2010 and 2012 elections, far too many bogus asylum seekers will crash up unto our shores and be set loose starting on January 4 until someone with some patriotic, political sense closes the flood gates in 2012.