I see from a post by Julia over at Orphans of Liberty that the Prime Minister has cucked to a bunch of whiners who were handwringing over the death of a woman from a very wealthy family who was pretending to be a refugee. It looks as if Boris Johnson is going to let a father and child stay in Britain even though they have seemingly no right to be here.

Mercy Bagunda was found dead next to her one year old son in their flat in Glasgow recently. Now of course this is a tragedy for the family involved but neither Mrs Bagunda or her child are Britain’s problem. She dragged out a patently false asylum claim for 14 years yet was still here at the time of her death. If she was a genuine refugee fleeing oppression then you can make some moral argument that Britain has some responsibility. But discerning the validity of a case of genuine refugee status would take a lot less time than 14 years. This case smells very heavily of migration fraud and no amount of hand-wringing and complaining by left wing activists and Scottish National Party MP’s like David Linden, can remove the odour of fraud from Mrs Bagunda’s case.

Of course I feel sorry for the one year old child left behind by Mrs Bagunda’s passing. He obviously needs to be cared for, but why does it need to be by us? Why should Mrs Bagunda’s widower need to be given asylum that he is most likely not entitled to because of her death? From reading the reports on this case that have been published over at the Ambush Predator site, I get the impression that Mrs Bagunda’s family are not poverty stricken, at least not relevantly poverty stricken for Uganda. In fact the family of Mrs Bagunda admit that they are not poor.

Surely the best place for this partly orphaned child is with their family in Uganda? There he can be loved, supported and nurtured in a culture which he will be able to relate to via his family. If he is allowed to stay and Mr Bagunda is not given asylum then he will probably end up as yet another casualty of Britain’s truly appalling ‘looked after children’ system. If Mr Bagunda is allowed to stay in the UK despite having no grounds for doing so then it makes a mockery of the asylum and migration rules and will cause further disgust among the public about Britain’s woefully open borders.

Now I’m not unsympathetic to those fleeing genuinely oppressive regimes but the Bagunda family do not come into that category, they were just looking for a different and better life. Looking for a better life is a valid reason to move to a different country, but it doesn’t mean that the nation that you want to go to should let you in.

The problem with this case is that Boris Johnson the PM has got involved and as usual he has cucked to the political Left. Mr Johnson will probably do all he can to get into the left and MSM’s good books by saying to the Bagunda’s that they can stay. Yet again we have an example of Boris Johnson acting anything but a conservative and acting in the interests of those many Britons who want to see excessive and fraudulent migration curbed and behaving more like a Lib Dem open borders type.